[Case Summary]This case involves administrative enforcement and land disputes. The plaintiff, Hu * *, legally owned a house and residential land in a certain county of Liaoning Province. On August 28, 2022, the County Transportation Bureau and the Town People's Government issued a "Notice" identifying part of his residential land as state-owned road land and ordering him to demolish it within a specified time limit. Hu * * disagreed with the decision and entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case on his behalf.\nQiu JuanThe lawyer first sued the "Notice" action, and the court determined that the house was legal and not within the scope of demolition. However, on November 11, 2022, the two defendants forcibly demolished the courtyard wall, weighbridge, etc. and occupied the road for construction without signing an agreement or implementing compensation. The core dispute lies in the factual basis and procedural legality of the forced demolition of ancillary facilities. Applicable laws: Article 34 of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, and relevant provisions of the Administrative Enforcement Law of the People's Republic of China. The court ruled that the two defendants' act of forcibly demolishing Hu's courtyard wall and weighbridge on November 11, 2022 was illegal.

I. Review of the case

The demolition of ancillary facilities on residential plots often prompts searches for questions such as "Is it illegal to demolish fences and weighbridges on residential plots?", "Is it legal to demolish buildings without compensation when roads are being built?", and "Is it necessary to go through the expropriation process when converting collective land into state-owned land?". Plaintiff Hu * legally owned a house in a certain county of Liaoning Province. On August 28, 2022, the County Transportation Bureau and the Town People's Government issued a "Notice" stating that part of the plaintiff's residential plot was identified as state-owned road land and required the plaintiff to remove the illegal buildings on the road land within a specified time limit. The plaintiff disagreed with the decision and entrusted Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for him/her.\nQiu JuanThe lawyer represented the plaintiff to safeguard their rights and file a lawsuit to confirm that the notice ordering the demolition was illegal. After the court's ruling, the plaintiff's house was found to be a legal building and was not within the scope of the demolition mentioned in the notice, so it did not need to be demolished. However, on November 11, 2022, the two defendants forcibly demolished the plaintiff's fence, weighbridge, and other ancillary facilities and occupied the land for road construction without the plaintiff signing a land agreement or receiving compensation, which resulted in the plaintiff's inability to ensure their safety when entering and leaving the premises and to operate normally at the site.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Whether the plaintiff's fence and other facilities are built within the scope of the defendant's legally authorized land use rights.The lawyer used the real estate ownership certificate to prove that the facilities were within the plaintiff's property rights, which contradicted the defendant's state-owned land use certificate.
  • Focus Two: Whether the collective land has been converted into state-owned land in accordance with the procedures of expropriation and compensation.The lawyer pointed out that it is illegal to handle state-owned land without first collecting fees, and it is unlawful to forcibly demolish buildings without proper authorization.
  • Focus Three: Whether the forced demolition complies with legal procedures.The lawyer pointed out based on the Administrative Enforcement Law that the defendant lacked sufficient procedural evidence and the forced demolition process was illegal.

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The original plaintiff (Hu某) claimed that:Hu * claimed that he owned a legal residential plot and house in the village and had obtained the Contracted Management Right Certificate and the Real Estate Property Certificate in accordance with the law. The defendant's forced demolition of the illegally occupied administrative buildings was illegal in both procedure and substance. He requested that the defendant's act of forcibly demolishing the ancillary facilities and occupying the residential plot on November 11, 2022 be confirmed as illegal, and that the defendant bear the litigation costs.

The defendant (the Transportation Bureau and the Town Government) argued that:The two defendants claimed that the demolition was lawful, citing the minutes of the 21st meeting of the county people's government as evidence; the cultural wall of the demolished buildings was built by the town government, and the other buildings were illegal structures, so the demolition was lawful according to regulations; the plaintiff's use of the land was illegal, and the defendant's transportation bureau's use of the land for road construction was legal. They requested that the plaintiff's claims be dismissed.

Hengluo Lawyer's Representation Opinion:\nQiu JuanThe lawyer pointed out that the defendant does not recognize the three properties of the evidence, and the handling process is illegal. The land involved in the case is collective land, and it must be expropriated and compensated for the farmers before it can be converted into state-owned land. It is illegal for the defendant to handle state-owned land without expropriation. The defendant's use certificate does not have a detailed land occupation address, so it cannot be confirmed that the plaintiff's occupied residential land is within the scope of the state-owned land use right certificate. According to the plaintiff's state-owned land immovable property certificate, the cultural wall and the land south of it are all within the plaintiff's property certificate, which contradicts the state-owned land use certificate provided by the defendant.

IV. Outcome of the case

The court held that: According to Article 34 of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the factual evidence provided by the defendant County Transportation Bureau cannot prove that the construction of the plaintiff's courtyard wall and other facilities is within the scope of the land where the plaintiff enjoys legal use rights, or within the highway construction control zone under its jurisdiction. Therefore, its forced demolition on the grounds that the courtyard wall and other facilities occupy legal highway land lacks factual evidence. According to Chapter IV of the Administrative Enforcement Law of the People's Republic of China, the defendant's procedural evidence is insufficient to prove that it has fulfilled the statutory procedures, and the forced demolition violates the procedural law. It should be confirmed as illegal. The defendant XX County Town People's Government, as the subject of the forced demolition, only relied on the "Minutes of the County Government Business Meeting" as the legal basis for its actions, without providing other legal grounds, which constitutes an exceeding of its authority. In summary, the court ruled that the forced demolition of the plaintiff Hu's courtyard wall and weighbridge by the defendant County Transportation Bureau and XX County XX Town People's Government on November 11, 2022, was illegal, and the case acceptance fee shall be borne by the defendant.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Advice

This case is represented by Attorney Qiu Juan of Beijing Henglu Law Firm (practice license number: 11101201811026953, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ). Collective land must be expropriated and compensated for farmers in accordance with the law before it can be converted into state-owned land. If a party claims the right to use state-owned land without expropriation and then forcibly demolishes the ancillary facilities of the residential land, there is no legal basis for such actions. Administrative organs must have statutory powers and complete procedures to carry out forced demolitions. Forced demolitions based solely on meeting minutes constitute an exceeding of authority and procedural violations, which can be confirmed as illegal. When encountering forced demolitions for road construction, it is necessary to promptly preserve the property ownership certificates and on-site evidence.

VI. Common Questions and Answers about Land Acquisition and Demolition Cases

  1. Q: Is it illegal to forcibly demolish the fence and weighbridge of a courtyard?
    A:If the forced demolition lacks factual basis (the facilities are within your property rights) and fails to comply with legal procedures, the court may confirm the illegality; and the defendant's forced demolition solely on the basis of the meeting minutes may also exceed its authority.
  2. Q: Can the government forcibly demolish a road construction site without providing compensation for the land occupied by it?
    A:No. The transfer of collective land to state-owned land requires expropriation and resettlement compensation in accordance with the law. Forcing demolition without expropriation lacks a legal basis.
  3. Q: How can collective land be legally transformed into state-owned land?
    A:It is necessary to carry out the expropriation procedures and provide resettlement and compensation to farmers in accordance with the law. Otherwise, it is illegal to handle the national land use certificates.
  4. Q: How to confirm that the forced demolition process is illegal?
    A:It is possible to request confirmation that the forced demolition is illegal, and the focus of the review should be on whether the defendant has legal authority and whether it has fulfilled procedures such as announcement, notice, and enforcement decisions.
  5. Q: Can a real estate ownership certificate be used to resist forced demolition?
    A:Yes. The certificate can prove that the facility is within your legal property rights. When it conflicts with the defendant's claim about the scope of the road land, the defendant lacks sufficient evidence to support the demolition.