[Field: Laws and Regulations]

Judicial Interpretation of the Supreme Law on Mining Rights Disputes: The government must compensate fairly if it takes back mining rights in advance

"With just one word from the government, my mine will be closed down, and the compensation will not be enough to repay the loan!"

This is the most common problem reported by the mining business owners I have received in the past two years. The mines were shut down by policy, and the compensation provided by the government was far lower than the actual investment, leaving business owners in a dilemma of safeguarding their rights.

In 2026, with the"Regulations on the Implementation of the Mineral Resources Law"The formal implementation and the continuous improvement of the Supreme Law’s judicial interpretation of mineral rights disputes,The government must provide fair compensation if it takes back mineral rights earlyThe rules are very clear. Today, Lawyer Liu will give business owners a detailed explanation from a legal perspective.

1. What core rules have been established in judicial interpretations?

The Supreme People’s Court’s Judicial Interpretation on Mining Rights Disputes clearly stipulates:If mining rights need to be recovered early due to public interests, fair compensation should be provided. This rule contains three core meanings:

First, fair compensation is a legal obligation, not an administrative favor.The government's resumption of mineral rights is not a unilateral mandatory administrative act, but a civil legal act that requires consensus with the mineral rights holder. Compensation standards must be based on the actual value of mining rights, rather than unilateral pricing by administrative agencies.

Second, compensation must be based on a third-party professional assessment.Article 45 of the "Regulations for the Implementation of the Mineral Resources Law" clearly stipulates: "If the mining rights are recovered in advance, a qualified evaluation agency shall be entrusted to evaluate the value of the mining rights, and the amount of compensation shall be determined based on this."

Third, policy shutdown cannot be a reason to deprive the value of mineral rights without compensation.Even if a mine is shut down due to environmental inspections, resource integration, etc., the property rights and interests obtained by the mining right holder in accordance with the law are still protected by law and cannot be deprived of it without compensation in the name of "public interest."

2. Typical cases: Compensation disputes are resolved in this way

【Case Review】A mining company in a certain province held the mining rights of a metal mine and was asked to withdraw due to the adjustment of ecological red lines. The business owner invested a total of 38 million yuan in mineral rights and infrastructure construction in the early stage, but the local government only agreed to compensate 12 million yuan on the grounds that "the mineral rights price already included part of the investment."

After Company A entrusted our firm to intervene, it first applied for a third-party assessment. Evaluations by professional organizations show that the market value of the mining rights includes the premium for conversion of exploration rights to mining, production capacity value, expected income, etc., totaling 51 million yuan. Our firm subsequently filed an administrative compensation lawsuit with the court, and the court ultimately ruled that the local government should compensate the company based on the assessed value.

What does this case illustrate?Compensation plans from administrative agencies often depress values, and companies must proactively apply for third-party appraisals and use professional appraisal reports to speak for themselves.

3. Three common misunderstandings among enterprises

Misunderstanding 1: Thinking that if the government shuts down, you must obey it unconditionally.In fact, even if there is a policy shutdown, mining rights holders still have the right to fair compensation.

Misunderstanding 2: Accept the government’s unilaterally priced compensation plan.The law clearly requires third-party evaluation as the basis, and companies have the right to refuse unreasonable low-price compensation.

Misunderstanding 3: Thinking of safeguarding rights only after missing the legal deadline.The application period for administrative compensation is generally within two years from the date when the administrative action was known or should have been known. Delay may result in the loss of rights.

Lawyer’s advice: Enterprises should do this if the government takes back mining rights in advance

1.Entrust a qualified evaluation agency to evaluate the value of mining rights as soon as possible, don’t wait for the government to come up with a plan before reacting passively;

2.Completely retain evidence such as investment vouchers, mining rights documents, production and operation materials, etc., laying the foundation for subsequent rights protection;

3.If you have objections to the government’s compensation plan, do not sign the agreement hastily., promptly consult a professional mining lawyer;

4.If negotiation fails, an administrative compensation lawsuit will be filed promptly, judicial interpretations provide companies with clear relief channels.

The government can take back mineral rights in accordance with the law, but it must compensate fairly.What the law protects is not the "mining boss who refuses to leave", but the legitimate property rights and interests of mining companies that invest and operate legally.