Recently, a cultural tourism company represented by lawyer Li Wangjun's team clashed with a large-scale architectural design firm.Group CompanyConstruction project design contract dispute caseexistAfter losing the first instance, the second instance successfully overturned the original judgment, recovering over 6.7 million yuan in economic losses for the client. Even after the final judgment took effect, the opposing party remained dissatisfied and filed several appeals.Apply to the Provincial High CourtRetrial andTo the cityProsecutorThe court applied for trialAll requests for oversight were rejected.
I. Case Background: Design deliverables submitted, but design fees of several million yuan owed.
In 2018, a cultural tourism company signed a design subcontract with a large architectural design institute, agreeing that the cultural tourism company would undertake the exterior cladding design work for a theme park project, with a total contract price of 15 million yuan.00+Ten thousand yuan. After the contract was signed,ShouldThe cultural tourism company actively fulfilled its design obligations.Completed in succession and put into the buildingDesign Institute SubmittedAlreadyDesign deliverables. However, the project was halted midway through.project，architectureThe design institute only paid approximatelyMore than 380After paying a design fee of 10,000 yuan, the company stopped making payments. After repeated unsuccessful attempts to collect the payment, the cultural tourism company commissioned [a new agency/company] in 2023.our firmLi Wangjun's legal team filed this lawsuit.
II. Challenges encountered upon accepting the case: A serious lack of core evidence makes prosecution extremely difficult.
Upon accepting the case, the company faced an extremely unfavorable situation: the cultural tourism company's design team had collectively resigned, a large amount of design process data had been taken away or lost, and the company had very limited information regarding the status of completed design deliverables and the location of the drawings. In engineering design litigation, completed design deliverables...yesThe fundamental basis for claiming design fees,andThe severe lack of evidence makes even calculating the amount in dispute extremely difficult.Attorney Li WangjunWith limited materials provided by the client, the team painstakingly completed the initial evidence review and, in December 2023, obtained approximately 58 [units of evidence].0+The plaintiff filed a lawsuit in court seeking a design fee of 10,000 yuan.Alreadylitigation.
III. A Turning Point Emerges: Unearthing Key Clues from the Opponent's Evidence
After the case was filed, the team did not stop at the existing materials, but instead communicated with the client repeatedly with a more meticulous and serious attitude, deeply exploring all possible clues. During the court proceedings, the team keenly noticed a key email submitted by the opposing party—2021YearThe design institute had previously sent an email to the cultural tourism company with the subject line "Contract Settlement Data Statistics Table and Deliverables," containing a summary of completed design deliverables and all design drawings. Following this lead, the team successfully recovered previously unavailable key evidence, and based on this, increased the claimed amount to approximately 9...More than 20Ten thousand yuan.
IV. First Instance Stage: Despite Thorough Preparation, Unfavorable Judgment Still Received
During the first review stage, the team systematically reviewed and deeply analyzed the limited materials provided by the client, sifting through a large number of emails to reconstruct the design deliverables.Completed andSubmission status.However, in its first-instance defense, the design institute not only did not accept our claims, but also argued that the design fee of more than 3.8 million yuan already paid was "overpaid".againstBoth sides onDesign fee amountof hugeDispute, Court of First InstanceIt was not clarified whether judicial appraisal procedures would be initiated.，The court made its first-instance judgment without even asking whether we could provide completed design deliverables.The court dismissed all claims on two grounds: "inability to provide design drawings" and "inability to provide a reasonable explanation for employee emails." After losing the first instance, the team quickly organized an appeal.
V. Second Instance Judgment: Professional Analysis Adopted by the Court
During the second trial, the team focused onThe first-instance judgmentThe team provided targeted arguments for both grounds for rejection. Regarding the design drawings, the team clearly pointed out that the first instance's findings were seriously inconsistent with the facts—the settlement email previously sent by the design institute itself contained all the design deliverables drawings, and this evidence had already been submitted in the first instance. Regarding...Cultural tourism companystaffSentRegarding the email issue, the employee had already left the company and was involved in a labor dispute, making cooperation impossible. The emails he sent contained a large amount of design area data and settlement forms, with complex and obscure content. The team invested a significant amount of time to meticulously check, cross-reference, and logically deduce the massive amount of data in the emails, ultimately clarifying the meaning and correspondence of each data point. A detailed written statement was submitted to the appellate court to explain this process. Based on this,On the advice of the legal team, the cultural tourism company was also commissioned.An application for expert evaluation was submitted to the appellate court, but given that...Legal teamWith sufficient reasoning and clear data organization, the appellate court, after review, held that...WorkloadIt can already be determined based on the evidence on file, and there is no need to initiate an expert evaluation procedure.，andThe team's core viewpoints were adopted.The final second-instance judgmentReversal of judgmentSupportedDesign fee 670+Ten thousand yuan plus interest.
After the second-instance judgment took effect, the design institute applied to the Provincial Higher People's Court for retrial and to the Municipal People's Procuratorate for supervision, both of which were rejected. This case lasted nearly three years.，ExperienceFirst instance, second instance, retrial, and trial supervisionIn this legal process, the legal team demonstrated professionalism and perseverance.Ultimately, the legitimate rights and interests of the parties involved were successfully protected.It achieved results far exceeding expectations.
sixInsights from the case: Professionalism and meticulousness are the core strengths for reversing the course of litigation.
The successful reversal of this case fully demonstrates the professionalism and dedication of the legal team under extremely unfavorable evidentiary conditions. Faced with a severe lack of core evidence, the team meticulously examined the evidence, uncovering crucial clues from the opposing side's evidence; despite a complete defeat in the first instance, they relied on solid legal reasoning and rigorous data analysis...successThe appellate court was persuaded to correct the erroneous findings of the first instance. This case also profoundly illustrates that in civil litigation, a lawyer's professional judgment, meticulous work, and unwavering persistence are often the most reliable guarantees for achieving legal redress.
Li Wangjun's legal team will continue to uphold the professional, dedicated, and expert practice philosophy to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of every client.