[Case Summary]This case is an administrative enforcement lawsuit. Liu * and Zhang * legally obtained industrial land in a village in Hebei and built a factory, but were sealed up and had their water and electricity cut off by the law enforcement bureau because they failed to obtain a construction project planning permit, leaving the factory unusable for a long time. The two plaintiffs entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Qiu JuanThe lawyer filed an administrative lawsuit, claiming that the defendant failed to fulfill its obligation to provide explanations and notifications before sealing off the property and cutting off water and electricity, and violated Chen's right to make statements and defenses. The court ruled that the defendant had the right to take seizure measures, but the procedures were illegal, and the court confirmed that the seizure and power outage were illegal. Legal provisions applied: the provisions of the "Administrative Enforcement Law" on the procedures for seizure and detention, and the provisions on notifications and the delivery of lists in the "Administrative Litigation Law".

I. Review of the case

Business owners often search for terms like "Is it legal to seal off a factory with water and electricity cut off?", "Can a factory be shut down without a planning permit?", and "What procedures are required for administrative enforcement measures?" Liu * and Zhang * owned legal land in a village in Hebei Province. In August 2002, they paid the land transfer fee to obtain the "State-Owned Land Use Certificate", covering an area of 3,364.56 square meters, designated as industrial land, and with a termination date of 2052. Later, they cooperated to build a factory. In late 2022, the factory was renovated. On September 2, the law enforcement bureau received a report that the steel frame warehouse affected lighting. After investigation, it was found that the construction project had not obtained a planning permit. The bureau issued a "Notice to Stop Illegal Activities" and sealed off the factory.

On September 9th, the defendant did not inform the plaintiffs of the content of the punishment or the legal basis for it. Instead, he/she sealed the doors of the factory building and prohibited its use, and ordered the water and electricity supply companies to cut off the water and electricity supply, rendering the factory building unusable. The two plaintiffs entrusted someone to handle the matter on their behalf.\nQiu JuanThe lawyer defends the client's rights, arguing that the defendant failed to provide legal notifications or explain the reasons for the seizure, water and electricity cut-off, and denied the client's right to make statements and defenses before taking these actions. The lawyer requests that the court confirm the defendant's illegal actions and order the defendant to bear the litigation costs.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Does the defendant have the right to take compulsory measures of seizure?Building without obtaining a planning permit is illegal. While law enforcement agencies have the authority to take action against such violations, they must do so in accordance with the law.
  • Focus 2: Whether the procedures of sealing up, cutting off water and electricity are legal.Did they explain the reasons and legal basis for the action, safeguard the rights of the individuals involved, and prepare written records and inventories of the items seized?

III. Professional intervention by Hengluo Lawyers

The plaintiffs (Liu * and Zhang *) allege that:Before seizing the defendant's property and cutting off his water and electricity supply, the defendant failed to fulfill his obligation to provide explanations and notifications in accordance with the law, deprived the defendant of the right to make statements and defenses, violated legal provisions, and infringed upon his legitimate rights and interests. Therefore, we request that the court confirm the defendant's illegal actions.

The defendant (the law enforcement agency) argued that:The project involved unlawful construction without obtaining planning permission. According to the Administrative Enforcement Law, the authority has the right to take enforcement measures. Moreover, the plaintiff is not a qualified party and the lawsuit has exceeded the statute of limitations, so the lawsuit should be dismissed.

Hengluo Lawyer's Agency Opinion:\nQiu JuanThe lawyer pointed out that the defendant failed to explain the reasons and basis for taking enforcement measures, and the rights and remedies of the parties, before sealing up the factory and cutting off water and electricity. The defendant also failed to make on-site records and sealing decisions and lists, which violated the provisions of the Administrative Enforcement Law and infringed the plaintiff's rights and procedural violations. Whether the plaintiff's house is an illegal construction or not does not affect the determination of procedural violations.

IV. Outcome of the case

The court held that the plaintiff had illegally constructed the building without obtaining a construction project planning permit, which violated the law. The defendant had the right to take enforcement measures such as sealing up the site, but such measures should comply with legal procedures. The defendant failed to inform the plaintiff of the legal basis for the sealing up and power and water supply cut-off, nor did it inform the plaintiff of their rights and remedies. The defendant also failed to prepare on-site records and sealing-up decisions and lists, which violated the law and infringed the plaintiff's rights. Therefore, the court confirmed that the defendant's actions of sealing up the plaintiff's construction site and cutting off power and water supply were illegal. The court ruled that the defendant's actions of sealing up the plaintiff's construction site and cutting off power and water supply were illegal.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Qiu JuanThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101201811026953, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent. When the administrative organ implements the seizure and detention, it shall notify the party to appear on the spot, inform the party of the reasons and basis for the seizure and detention, and the remedies available, and make the decision on the seizure and detention and the list of the seized items. If the enterprise encounters "factory closure, water and electricity cutoff", it should promptly entrust a professional lawyer to review the illegal procedures and protect its rights.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions about Administrative Enforcement

  1. Q: Is it legal to seal off a factory and cut off its water and electricity supply?
    A:The government has the right to shut down services, but it must follow legal procedures. Cutting off water and electricity without notifying or issuing official documents is a violation of legal procedures.
  2. Q: Can the factory be shut down without a planning permit?
    A:Measures can be taken, but they must follow legal procedures. Otherwise, such actions may be deemed illegal.
  3. Q: What procedures must be followed for administrative coercive measures?
    A:Notify the parties to attend the hearing, inform them of the grounds and their right to seek remedies, prepare on-site minutes and a list of decisions made.
  4. Q: What should I do if the program is illegal, but the entity is also found to be in violation of the law?
    A:The fact that the substantive violation does not offset the procedural violation does not mean that the plaintiff cannot still request to confirm the procedural violation.
  5. Q: Can I claim compensation if the factory building is shut down?
    A:First, confirm that the behavior is illegal, and then apply for administrative compensation in accordance with the law.