Click on the top right corner [Follow] "Demolition and Relocation Legal Practice" headline number, private message reply to "consultation", you can enjoy one-on-one legal service consultation. This article is written by Jia Hua at Beijing Zaiming Law Firm
Introduction: In housing expropriation compensation cases, in general, the object of compensation is the expropriated person, that is, the owner of the house, and the lessee has no interest in the expropriation compensation act, so it cannot become a qualified plaintiff in administrative litigation. However, if the lessee has an inseparable attachment to the leased house, and carries out business activities in accordance with the law with the house it rents, then when the house is expropriated, the losses such as interior decoration and decoration, relocation of machinery and equipment, suspension of production and business proposed by the lessee shall be considered in accordance with the law. At this time, the lessee and the expropriation compensation act should be regarded as having an interest and can be filed as a plaintiff.
On December 31, 2003, Ms. Zhang signed an agreement with an economic cooperative to lease the vacant land on the side of the west road of the village to Ms. Zhang.
Moreover, in the agreement, it is clearly stipulated that in the event of land acquisition by the state, the state shall pay the loss of the above-ground property to the lessee. Because the plot in question was a pond abandoned at the time of lease, Ms. Zhang built a house after landfilling the plot. Based on this, Ms. Zhang should have the legal right to use the leased land and have legal ownership of the house on the ground.
Due to the construction of a road engineering project, the location of Ms. Zhang's house and above-ground appurtenances were included in the scope of demolition. On July 17, 2017, the demolition company made the "Notice of Household Investigation" to Ms. Zhang and carried out survey and survey work at the same time, but never delivered the assessment report and other documents to Ms. Zhang.
Later, with the assistance of lawyers, the court retrieved the "assessment report" made in the name of Ms. Zhang, the "Notice of Compensation Result for Housing Evacuation". Moreover, the notice did not assess the part of Ms. Zhang who filled in the pit before building the house.
In 2020, the economic cooperative sued Ms. Zhang for rescission of the lease contract, and claimed that Ms. Zhang did not have the ownership of the above-ground objects involved in the case and did not have the right to claim "demolition compensation" for the above-ground objects involved in the case. Ms. Zhang then entrusted lawyer Liang Hongli of Beijing Zaiming Law Firm to intervene. After lawyer Liang Hongli intervened, she understood and analyzed the basic situation.
In this case, because the "Letter of Agreement" had no basis for actual performance due to land acquisition by the state, but before receiving the corresponding compensation payment, an economic cooperative did not have the right to require Ms. Zhang to vacate the house.
The second paragraph of the agreement signed between Ms. Zhang and a village economic cooperative stipulates that in the event of land acquisition by the state, Ms. Zhang shall obey it, and the state shall pay compensation for the loss of above-ground property to Ms. Zhang;
The third paragraph of the agreement stipulates that the lease term is 15 years, from December 31, 2003 to the end of December 2018, and from December 31, 2003, Ms. Zhang controls and manages the land and aboveground objects involved in the contract, and occupies, uses and benefits. After the signing of the contract, the two parties fulfilled all their obligations according to the contract, and Ms. Zhang's rent during the lease period was also paid.
Lawyer Liang Hongli found through the collection of evidence that the project had obtained the approval documents for the project as early as 2016 and began to implement land expropriation, and the location of Ms. Zhang's house and above-ground appurtenances agreed in the agreement was within the scope of expropriation.
At the same time, the land use unit of the project obtained the approval document for land acquisition or land occupation as early as October 17, 2018, and the location of Ms. Zhang's house and above-ground appurtenances were expropriated at the latest on October 17, 2018, changing the nature of the land.
In summary, the location of Ms. Zhang's house and above-ground appurtenances was expropriated before the expiry of the lease term agreed in the contract, that is, before December 31, 2018. The statutory right of rescission of the contract according to the law includes the situation that the purpose of the contract cannot be achieved due to force majeure, the land parcel involved in the case has been expropriated, which belongs to the force majeure, and after the expropriation, due to the change of land attributes, the village collective can no longer continue to achieve the purpose of the contract, and the contract is terminated, rather than terminated due to the expiration of the contract.
(The mini program has been added here, please go to today's headline client to view)
At the same time, because the land involved in the case was expropriated, the land attribute was changed from collective land to state-owned land, and the village collective no longer owned the ownership of the plot, so she had no right to require Ms. Zhang to restore the land and house involved in the case to its original state and vacate it herself.
After that, lawyer Liang Hongli also filed a lawsuit against a sub-bureau of the town government, planning and natural resources committee, and the lawyer argued on the basis of reason, and the court finally adopted the view of lawyer Liang Hongli, holding that when the house involved in the case was included in the scope of land acquisition for a project, the "Letter of Agreement" signed by Ms. Zhang and a village economic cooperative was still within the validity period, Ms. Zhang still had the right to use the leased land, and the two parties had clearly agreed that the loss of above-ground property of the leased land belonged to Ms. Zhang. Therefore, Ms. Zhang has a legal interest in a certain engineering project, and the client, Ms. Zhang, can finally file a lawsuit as a plaintiff and protect her legitimate rights and interests through legal procedures.
The parties to the lease relationship shall negotiate the termination of the contract after the lessee has obtained reasonable compensation. There are strict conditions for the termination of the contract, unless there is a statutory rescission, otherwise the two parties must negotiate to rescind, "state expropriation" does not meet the statutory reasons for rescission of the contract, and the lessor has no right to unilaterally terminate the contract.
At the beginning of expropriation, the lessor's attempt to deprive the lessee of the qualification to obtain reasonable compensation by terminating the contract lawsuit is contrary to the principle of good faith of the Civil Law and the spirit of procedural justice of the Civil Procedure Law.
Therefore, in the case of lawyer Ming, he should remind the majority of expropriated persons not to panic when encountering expropriation, especially when signing a lease agreement in the early stage, they can stipulate the situation of expropriation, if they encounter expropriation, how to deal with it, when necessary, they can entrust lawyers to intervene, so as to better protect the legitimate rights and interests of the lessee.
