Legal information

Introduction to the article: The same piece of land was expropriated twice. The plaintiff refused to accept the expropriation and filed a lawsuit in court. The Shanxi court ruled that the district government illegally expropriated land!

Part One: Basic Case Facts

1. On December 20, 2015, the defendant issued the "Notice on the Expropriation of Above-ground Houses, Ground Facilities and Attachments within the New Town Planning Area" and decided to expropriate the houses within the villages under the jurisdiction of the Xijuba Subdistrict Office and Chengbei Subdistrict Office in Lishi District. The plaintiff's house is within the scope of expropriation. On December 20, 2015, the defendant decided to expropriate the above-ground houses, ground facilities and attachments within the new city planning area of Lishi District through the "Notice of the People's Government of Lishi District, Luliang City on the Expropriation of Above-ground Houses, Ground Facilities and Attachments within the New Town Planning Area" (Lizhengtong (2015) No. 9), and announced the specific scope of expropriation. The scope of expropriation includes the plaintiff's house. The plaintiff believes that the expropriation decision made by the defendant is illegal.

2. The plaintiff Wu Haiyin was dissatisfied with the administrative decision of the Lishi District People’s Government of Luliang City (hereinafter referred to as the Lishi District Government) on house expropriation. The court made an administrative judgment on December 1, 2016. Plaintiff Wu Haiyin was dissatisfied and appealed to the Shanxi Provincial Higher People's Court. The Shanxi Provincial Higher People's Court made an administrative ruling on September 19, 2017, revoking the original judgment and sending it back to the Jinzhong Intermediate People's Court for retrial. The court formed a separate collegial panel in accordance with the law and held a public hearing on the case on March 26, 2018. Plaintiff Wu Haiyin and authorized agents Dong Guonv and Lu Yongqiang, and defendant Lishi District Government’s authorized agents Luo Yawei and Xue Junyi attended the court to participate in the lawsuit. This case has been concluded.

Part Two: Focus of Controversy

1. The basic reasons why the plaintiff believes that the expropriation decision made by the defendant is illegal

(1) The defendant did not meet the legal conditions for making the decision to expropriate houses. The defendant expropriated all houses within the new city planning area without distinguishing whether there were specific construction projects and whether the construction projects involved were in the public interest, which did not meet the conditions stipulated by law;

(2) The defendant applied wrong laws and regulations when making the decision to expropriate the houses. Regarding the collective land within the expropriation scope, the Lishi District People's Government claimed that the expropriation was carried out in accordance with the "Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land" and the "Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land in Shanxi Province". After the above-mentioned houses were expropriated in accordance with the law, the collective land use rights were recovered at the same time. According to the law, the municipal government does not have the authority to approve the expropriation of the collective land within the above-mentioned expropriation scope, and the expropriation should be confirmed to be illegal; (3) The effective date of the "Shanxi Province Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land" is January 1, 2016, and the "Notice" determines the date of house expropriation as December 20, 2015. When the house expropriation decision was made, the "Shanxi Province Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land" had not yet taken effect and should not be applied;

(4) The defendant's procedure for making the house expropriation decision was illegal, and the expropriation decision did not comply with the procedures stipulated in the "Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land";

(5) The defendant’s expropriation decision was not in compliance with the national economic and social development plan, overall land use plan, urban and rural planning and special planning and was not incorporated into the municipal and county-level national economic and social development annual plans. Request the People's Court to revoke the administrative action of the defendant's decision to expropriate the above-ground houses, ground facilities and attachments within the new city planning area of Lishi District, Luliang City. The plaintiff provided the following evidence: the plaintiff’s identity certificate, notice of involvement in the case, and corresponding land certificates.

2. Reasons of the defendant Lishi District Government

(1) The subject matter of expropriation specified in the “Notice” was all attached to the collective land at the time when the “Notice” was made;

(2) The subject matter stated in the "Notice" and the collective land to which the subject matter belongs had all been approved for expropriation by the Shanxi Provincial People's Government before 2014. After that, the Luliang Municipal People's Government made announcements on land expropriation in accordance with the law, and the Luliang Municipal Land and Resources Bureau made announcements on land expropriation compensation in accordance with the law.

(3) The "Notice" was made on December 20, 2015, after the Luliang Municipal People's Government's land acquisition announcement and the Luliang Municipal Land and Resources Bureau's land acquisition compensation announcement.

(4) The subject matter of expropriation specified in the "Notice" is included in the scope of expropriation and compensation announced by the Luliang Municipal People's Government and Luliang Municipal Land and Resources Bureau. All completed land expropriation is based on the land expropriation implementation plan approved by the provincial government.

(5) The notice of the plaintiff’s petition did not have any actual impact on the plaintiff’s rights. According to Article 69 of the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People’s Republic of China, the plaintiff does not meet the conditions for prosecution.

3. After cross-examination in court, the plaintiff’s comprehensive cross-examination opinions on the defendant’s evidence are as follows.

1. The legal basis for the defendant’s administrative actions was illegal, the procedures were illegal, and he exceeded his authority;

2. Agree with part of the defendant’s point of view, that is, in the process of expropriating the plaintiff’s house attachments and other buildings on the ground, the defendant and the Luliang Municipal Government jointly implemented administrative actions. The defendant’s evidence is sufficient to show that the Luliang Municipal People’s Government was also involved, and the Luliang Municipal Government should also be the defendant in this case;

3. The accused administrative act jointly made by the Luliang Municipal People's Government and the defendant exceeds its authority, has illegal procedures, unclear facts, and wrong application of law, and should be revoked according to law. Regarding the expropriation approval documents submitted in the evidence, the review of this act is unclear. The scope of the expropriation is the entire village. There are collective land and state-owned land within the entire village. This document cannot be clear. The expropriation act itself has unclear facts. The defendant had no objection to the plaintiff's evidence.

4. After deliberation by the collegial panel, the results are as follows.

The evidence provided by the defendant can prove the factual process of the administrative action involved in the lawsuit, and the evidence related to the case can be used as evidence to determine the facts of the case. Since the Lishi District People's Government has withdrawn the notice involving the lawsuit, if the evidence provided by the defendant is related to the case, this court will accept it based on the circumstances of the entire case; the evidence provided by the plaintiff is related to the case and can be accepted.

Part Three: Court Finds

1. After the trial, it was found that from April 2013 to August 2014, the Shanxi Provincial People's Government issued multiple approval documents, respectively approving the Luliang Municipal People's Government to convert collective agricultural land, construction land, and collective unused land into construction land and go through expropriation procedures. The construction land in the approval involves land in the Xizhuba Subdistrict and Chengbei Subdistrict Offices of Lishi District, including the village where the plaintiff is located. 2. At the same time, the Luliang Municipal People's Government also issued a land acquisition announcement and a land acquisition compensation and resettlement plan announcement based on the corresponding approval. On December 20, 2015, the People's Government of Lishi District, Luliang City issued Li Zhengtong (2015) No. 9 "Notice of the People's Government of Lishi District, Luliang City on the Expropriation of Above-ground Houses, Ground Facilities and Attachments within the New Town Planning Area", the main content of which For: According to the "Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land" and the "Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land in Shanxi Province" that came into effect on January 1, 2016, it was decided to expropriate above-ground houses, ground facilities and attachments within the new city planning area. (1) The expropriation scope includes Shengdi Village, Maotaping Village, Shuushuling Village, Hengling Village, Xiba Village, Shang'an Village, Liuziju Village, Dongba Village, and Shuangwudu Village under the jurisdiction of the Xiba Subdistrict Office; Wangjiagou Village, Lijiagou Village, Shamagou Village, Sujiaya Village, and Qianzhaojia Village under the jurisdiction of the Chengbei Subdistrict Office Zhuang Village, Houzhaojiazhuang Village and Xia'an Village; (2) After the above-mentioned houses are expropriated according to law, the collective land use rights will be recovered at the same time; (3) The houses, ground facilities and attachments within the above-mentioned expropriated scope will be expropriated and compensated, and the Luliang Municipal People's Government has authorized Lishi District to organize and implement them. After study and decision by the Lishi District Government, the Lishi District New City Construction Headquarters will organize and implement the project, and at the same time entrust the Xizhuba Subdistrict and Chengbei Subdistrict Offices to specifically undertake the housing expropriation and compensation work within the jurisdiction of the above-mentioned expropriation scope. The announcement also informed the expropriated persons of the corresponding administrative reconsideration and litigation rights. During the trial, the defendant stated that there was no separate collection decision, and the notice itself was the decision. The plaintiff's house is located within the above-mentioned expropriation range. The plaintiff was dissatisfied with the above notice and filed a lawsuit. During the course of the lawsuit, the defendant Lishi District Government issued Li Zheng Tong [2016] No. 5 "Notice on Cancellation of Li Zheng Tong [2015] No. 9 Notice" on October 8, 2016. The notice decided to cancel Li Zheng Tong [2015] No. 9 on the grounds that it violated the relevant provisions of the Luliang Municipal People's Government's normative documents.

Part Four: Court Judgment Results

1. Legal basis for judgment

The Jinzhong Intermediate People's Court held that according to the relevant provisions of the Land Management Law of the People's Republic of China, the expropriation of collective land and houses should be regulated by the Land Management Law of the People's Republic of China. The evidence provided by the defendant showed that the Shanxi Provincial People's Government had approved the Luliang Municipal People's Government to handle expropriation procedures for the collective land in the village where the plaintiff was located. At the same time, the Luliang Municipal People's Government and the Luliang Municipal Land and Resources Bureau also issued land expropriation announcements and land expropriation compensation and resettlement plan announcements in response to the corresponding approvals in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Land Management Law of the People's Republic of China. Under this circumstance, the Lishi District People's Government of Luliang City expropriated the houses and land on the collective land involved in the lawsuit in accordance with the "Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land" and issued an announcement, which is without legal basis.

2. Referee’s point of view

Based on the above circumstances, the notice involved in the lawsuit should be revoked. However, during the trial of the case, the defendant Lishi District Government issued the "Notice on Cancellation of Li Zheng Tong [2015] No. 9 Notice" on October 8, 2016, and decided to revoke the Li Zheng Tong [2015] No. 9 Notice on the grounds that it violated the relevant provisions of the Luliang Municipal People's Government's normative documents. Since the plaintiff was unwilling to withdraw the lawsuit after the defendant changed its original administrative behavior, a judgment confirming the violation of law should be made in this case. In accordance with the provisions of Article 81, paragraph 3, of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China", the judgment is as follows:

3. Judgment result

It is confirmed that the "Notice of the Lishi District People's Government of Luliang City on the expropriation of above-ground houses, ground facilities and attachments within the new city planning area" issued by the Lishi District People's Government of Luliang City on December 20, 2015, Li Zhengtong (2015) No. 9, is illegal.