[Case Summary]This case involves a dispute over the forced clearance of contracted land. Zhang Zhichuan, a villager from Hebei, had 18 mu of contracted land that was expropriated for construction. He did not sign a compensation agreement, and the attachments on the land were forcibly removed one after another. Zhang Zhichuan entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Shang RuichaoThe lawyer initiated an administrative lawsuit, conducted comprehensive evidence collection, and made precise defenses. The Shijiazhuang Intermediate Court determined that the municipal government lacked the statutory authority to conduct forced removal and that the removal process was illegal, ruling that the forced removal action was unlawful. The core disputes include: the subject of responsibility for forced removal, legal authority and procedures; and the application of the Land Administration Law, the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law, and the Administrative Litigation Law.

I. Review of the Case

The compensation for the contracted land has not been agreed upon, but the trees and houses on the land have already been cleared. Can I win the lawsuit? Many people search for "How to protect rights when contracted land is forcibly cleared" and "Can forced clearance be carried out without signing an agreement for land expropriation?" Zhang Zhichuan's family owned two legally contracted plots of land totaling 18 mu in the village, which were included in the expropriation scope in 2018. Due to the failure to reach an agreement on compensation and sign an agreement, the wheat, sheep pens, houses, and fruit trees in the contracted land were forcibly cleared on October 8 and December 8, 2024. Zhang Zhichuan reported the case to the police and entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Shang RuichaoThe lawyer filed an administrative lawsuit, requesting to confirm the forced removal of the illegal construction.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Who is the responsible party for the forced clearance?The defendant argued that the act was committed by the land transferee, and the lawyer presumed the defendant as the responsible subject based on the statutory duties of the subject of expropriation.
  • Focus 2: Does the municipal government have the authority to forcibly remove people from their positions?The law does not grant administrative organs the right to enforce judgments by force, and they should apply to the court for enforcement instead.
  • Focus Three: Can the village committee be exempted from liability for paying the compensation on behalf of the villagers?The unilateral payment cannot be regarded as the plaintiff's acknowledgement of compensation or agreement to surrender the land.

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The original plaintiff claimed that:Zhang Zhichuan argued that he had not signed the compensation agreement and had not agreed to hand over the land. The defendant directly organized the removal of the attached objects on the land, violating the statutory expropriation procedures. He requested to confirm that the two forced removal actions were illegal.

The defendant argued that:The municipal government of A City claimed that the clearance was carried out by the land transferee and had nothing to do with them; the village committee has paid more than 1.57 million yuan in compensation according to the standard, and the plaintiff's rights and interests have not been substantially affected.

Legal Opinion by Hengluo Law Firm:Shang RuichaoThe lawyer assisted in organizing evidence such as direct grain subsidies, responses to requests for information disclosure, audio recordings of calls to the police, and satellite images of the before-and-after situation, forming a chain of evidence; pointed out that the defendant is the legal subject of expropriation and has the duty to supervise the implementation, so it can be presumed that the defendant is the responsible subject; the defendant does not have the legal authority to forcibly clear the land, and should apply to the court for enforcement; the village committee's unilateral payment cannot be regarded as the plaintiff's approval of the plan.

  • Retrieve the provincial government's approval and the reply to the request for information disclosure, and confirm that the contracted land is within the scope of the expropriation
  • Fix the two strong clearance actions, including the alarm, calls, and video evidence on the same day
  • Citing Article 62 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law, it is argued that it is necessary to apply to the court for enforcement

IV. Outcome of the case

The Shijiazhuang Intermediate Court adopted the lawyer's opinion, determining that the defendant, as the main body responsible for the implementation of the expropriation, had the duty to supervise the implementation process. The defendant's argument that the transferee's implementation of the expropriation was unfounded was rejected. The village committee's unilateral payment could not be regarded as the plaintiff's approval of the compensation and consent to the land transfer. The law does not grant administrative authorities the right to enforce by force, and the defendant's unilateral forced clearance of the land was illegal without applying to the court for enforcement according to the procedure. According to Article 74 Paragraph 2 Item 1 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China, the court ruled that the A City People's Government's forced removal of the fixtures on Zhang Zhichuan's contracted land was illegal, and the defendant shall bear the case acceptance fee.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Shang RuichaoAttorney (Practice License No.: 11101202211560090, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting on behalf of the client. Attorney's Note: When the expropriation has not been signed into an agreement, the administrative organ does not have the right to forcibly clear the property, and the expropriated party must apply to the people's court for enforcement; after the above-ground attachments have been forcibly cleared, the expropriated party shall immediately collect the ownership certificates, on-site photos, and police reports, and file an administrative lawsuit within six months after knowing that their rights and interests have been damaged.

VI. Common Questions and Answers about Forced Clearing of Land Acquisition and Demolition Cases

  1. Q: How to protect your rights if your contracted land is forcibly cleared?
    A:Immediately collect the ownership certificates, on-site photos, and police reports, and file an administrative lawsuit within six months to confirm that Qiangqing violated the law.
  2. Q: Can the authorities forcibly remove the property if no agreement has been signed for the expropriation?
    A:No. The law does not grant administrative organs the right to enforce the law by force. It is necessary for governments at or above the county level to order the land surrender and apply to the court for enforcement.
  3. Q: If the village committee distributes the compensation funds on my behalf, does that mean I agree to the expropriation?
    A:No. If the compensation is paid to an account that is not personally claimed or approved by the claimant, it cannot be considered as an agreement to accept the compensation plan or to agree to surrender the land.
  4. Q: Who is the responsible party for the forced eviction?
    A:The statutory expropriation organization, as the main body responsible for supervising the implementation of the expropriation, should be regarded as the responsible subject based on the facts and should be listed as the defendant in the lawsuit.
  5. Q: If Qiangqing violated the law but the building has already been demolished, can they still be compensated?
    A:After confirming the violation, the party concerned may claim administrative compensation on this basis to make up for the losses of the fixtures and seedlings on the ground.