land expropriation

[Case Introduction]
Teacher Ye and others are villagers from a village in Baishu Township, Zhongjiang County, Deyang City. The village's homestead houses and contracted land were all included in the expropriation scope of the Suide Expressway project. No compensation and resettlement agreement was reached. The construction unit bulldozed the contracted land, dug out the entrance road, and damaged the house walls. Teacher Ye and others then sought help from a lawyer.

Specializing in legal affairs such as administrative litigation and criminal litigation related to land acquisition and demolition, he has extensive experience in administrative reconsideration, administrative litigation and civil litigation in real estate disputes. Since his practice, he has represented and consulted on thousands of real estate dispute cases including land expropriation, house demolition, land ownership disputes, land infringement, house sales, and real estate mortgages in 28 provinces and municipalities, involving hundreds of millions of yuan in assets, and has accumulated rich experience in handling cases.

[Case Progress]
After accepting the entrustment, the Beijing land acquisition and demolition lawyer immediately started working and communicated with the client many times. After investigation and evidence collection, he learned that the expropriation project was suspected of unauthorized occupation, and then ordered the client to file a lawsuit with the Deyang Intermediate People's Court with the Zhongjiang County People's Government as the defendant.

At the first instance, the court ruled not to file the case on the grounds that the evidence against the county government was insufficient. The plaintiff was dissatisfied and appealed.
[Judgment result]
Based on the evidence submitted by the parties in the first instance and the legal opinions mentioned by the lawyers in the appeal, the Sichuan Higher People's Court held in writing that the parties had submitted evidence to prove that their houses and contracted land were included in the scope of expropriation. In the absence of claims from other agencies, it should be presumed that the county government, as the legal subject of the expropriation, caused damage to the houses.

It believed that the Deyang Intermediate Court made an error in applying the law, revoked the first-instance ruling, and ordered the Deyang Intermediate Court to file the case.

The legal knowledge in this article does not represent legal advice. If you encounter similar problems, you should analyze them in detail. If you want to know more about this, you can consult a lawyer on this site for one-on-one online consultation.