Starting work depends on the introduction and presence of the qualified builder
The second part: criteria for the proposed action
In any case, considering the concerns and the multitude of questions of colleagues (especially raising the issue of a possible complaint (administrative or legal) by the owner against the supervisor due to #prolongation of the project), the lack of specific instructions and administrative inconsistencies in the implementation and implementation of the above-mentioned notices and considering Taking the duties and assignments prescribed for supervisors in topics 2 and 12 of the National Building Regulations, the following method is suggested as a #practice_criterion:
According to the procedure taken by the organization and the fact that “any complaint from the supervisor for the implementation of national regulations and the request for the presence of a competent manufacturer in the workshop will not be heard in the organization and the disciplinary council” and since the administrative instructions of the Tehran province organization regarding Competent executive is different from the municipal administrative instruction, which basically does not cooperate appropriately with the presence of competent executive in the projects based on the decision of the Court of Administrative Justice;
It is necessary to notify the owner in writing by the supervisor at the same time as “the beginning of referring the work and confirming it in the cartable” that: the start of the construction operation is only subject to the introduction of a competent contractor whose contract has been registered in the Organization of Construction Engineering System of Tehran province. by the owner to the supervisor. (According to paragraphs 14-4-3 of the second topic of the National Building Regulations for real inspectors and paragraph 15-4-7 for legal inspectors)
It is emphasized that this notification to the owner by the supervisor should be done in the first few days after the referral and should not be delayed.
Because according to “#Qaidah_Fiqhi_Aqdam”, whenever a person with attention and awareness performs an action that causes damage to him by others, the person causing the damage, who is another person, will not be responsible for the damage. The jurists have considered the non-responsibility of the causer of damage as documented by “act”; By stating that a person has caused the destruction of the sanctity of his malay by his action.
Therefore, if the owner claims that the supervisor caused him losses by not starting the work and prolonging the project, in the defense it should be said that the owner did not fulfill his duty in introducing the executive and that he was the main factor in prolonging the project and due to the rule Jurisprudence has acted to his detriment.
It should be noted that contrary to the opinions expressed in some engineering circles regarding the 3rd degree disciplinary decision dated 5/12/97, which is mentioned in the defense summary section, “it will be issued in the event of the introduction of a competent executive and other cases to start work.” “, the follow-ups and inquiries made indicate that the Disciplinary Council fully supports the announcements and directives of the organization in relation to the competent executive, and any complaint from the supervisor for the implementation of the national building regulations and the request for the presence of the competent builder in the workshop in the organization and the council Discipline is not audible.
the end
Cultivate reference writing. Prepared and edited by: Companion of the Observer (updated on 1/24/97). Sources:
1- The contents of Nazersakhtman’s companion channel.
2- Engineering Law channel, Professor Mehdi Laeeq, question number 125
3- Topic 2 of National Building Regulations.
#Kanal_Mahrah_Nazer
@hamrahenazer
This post is written by Archiiiitecture