[Case Summary]This case is an administrative litigation case (confirming the forced demolition of illegal buildings). Zhang * *, the owner of a commercial house in Area A of Fushun City, failed to reach a compensation agreement with the government of Area A due to relocating to avoid geological disasters. After the compensation decision made by the district government was revoked by the court and the court ordered the payment of more than 1.15 million yuan, the district government neither made the payment nor deposited the money, but instead forcibly demolished the house. Zhang * * entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for him/her.Song Meina、Marcie WenThe lawyer filed an administrative lawsuit, requesting to confirm that the forced demolition was illegal. The court accepted the lawyer's opinion and ruled that the A District government's forced demolition was illegal, and the case acceptance fee would be borne by the government. The core disputes are whether the failure to pay compensation after the effective judgment and the forced demolition without depositing the compensation violate the principle of "compensation first, relocation later" and the procedures of the Administrative Enforcement Law. Applicable laws: the Administrative Enforcement Law, the Regulations on the Prevention and Control of Geological Disasters, and the relevant provisions of the Regulations on the Acquisition and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land.

I. Review of the case

"Is it illegal for the government to forcefully demolish without compensation?" and "How can I sue the government if my commercial property is forcibly demolished?" are frequently asked questions by those subject to expropriation. Zhang * is the owner of a commercial property in A District of Fushun City, with a building area of 258.93 square meters. He obtained the ownership certificate in 2003. The property was included in the relocation scope for geological disaster prevention, but Zhang * and the A District government failed to reach an agreement on compensation. The district government unilaterally made a compensation decision, which Zhang * appealed to have it revoked. In October 2024, the Liaoning Provincial High Court upheld the first-instance judgment of "revoking the compensation decision and ordering the district government to pay compensation of 1,152,222.14 yuan and interest". However, after the final judgment took effect, the district government neither paid the compensation nor deposited it. Instead, it served a "Notice to Evacuate" on December 31, 2024, and a "Notice to Move Out" on April 1, 2025. On April 8, 2025, the district government forcibly demolished the property without Zhang * being present. Zhang * entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Song Meina、Ma QianwenThe lawyer filed an administrative lawsuit.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Whether it violates the principle of "compensation first, relocation later".When the compensation payment for the effective judgment has not been paid and the property has been forcibly demolished without being deposited, can the party concerned be exempted from the obligation to actively fulfill the compensation obligation?
  • Focus 2: Whether the forced demolition process is legal.The district government failed to make a legitimate administrative enforcement decision and failed to guarantee the right to make statements, defend oneself, and seek remedies. Does this comply with the Administrative Enforcement Law?
  • Focus 3: Whether it constitutes an emergency avoidance measure that justifies forced demolition.The district government cited the "Regulations on the Prevention and Control of Geological Disasters" to argue whether the forced demolition was legal or not.

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The plaintiff (Zhang *) claimed that:Zhang * claimed that he had a legal right to the house, and that the district government's failure to provide adequate compensation and its illegal procedures had resulted in the destruction of his property, violating the principle of "compensation first, relocation later". He therefore requested that the forced demolition be declared illegal.

The defendant (the A District government) argued that:The district government said that the demolition was an emergency measure to ensure public safety, in accordance with the Regulations on the Prevention and Control of Geological Disasters, the Administrative Enforcement Law, and municipal government documents. The government has served the eviction notice and reminder letter to fulfill its notification obligations. The plaintiff's failure to claim compensation is considered as giving up his rights.

Legal Opinion by Hengluo Law Firm:Song Meina、Marcia WenThe lawyer, drawing on his expertise in administrative law, refuted the illegality from three perspectives: First, by submitting the "House Ownership Certificate" to prove clear property rights, which cannot be violated according to the principle of "compensation first, relocation later". If the compensation is not in place, the destruction of the house constitutes a serious violation of the law; Second, the "Regulations on the Prevention and Control of Geological Disasters" only authorize the forced evacuation of people, but do not include the forced demolition of houses. The district government claimed that there is no basis for this; Third, the district government, as the subject of legal responsibility, should bear legal liability. However, it failed to make a legal decision on forced execution, failed to guarantee the right to make statements, defend oneself and seek remedies, and the procedure was seriously illegal.

  • The "House Ownership Certificate" is used to lock in legal property rights, ensuring that the principle of "compensation first, relocation later" cannot be violated
  • It is pointed out that the Regulations on the Prevention and Control of Geological Disasters do not have the authority to authorize the forced demolition of houses
  • The defendant alleges that the district government failed to guarantee Chen's right to present a defense and that the proceedings were seriously in violation of the law.

IV. Outcome of the case

The court adopted the lawyer's opinion and held that: The "Regulations on the Prevention and Control of Geological Disasters" only authorizes "forced evacuation of people" and does not include "forced demolition of houses". The district government claimed that it lacks legal basis; the compensation money in the effective judgment was not paid or deposited, which is not in line with the principle of "compensation first, relocation later". The defense of "not claiming compensation" cannot exempt the district government from its obligation to actively fulfill the compensation obligation; the district government failed to make a legitimate administrative enforcement decision and failed to guarantee the right to make statements, defend and seek remedies, which seriously violated the procedural law. Final judgment: Confirm that the defendant, Fushun City A District People's Government, illegally demolished the plaintiff's house on April 9, 2025; the case acceptance fee shall be borne by the A District government.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Advice

"Compensation first, relocation later" is an important principle of expropriation and demolition, which concerns the vital interests of the expropriated people. In case of forced demolition without compensation, it is necessary to entrust professional administrative lawyers to file an administrative lawsuit to protect their rights in time. This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Song Meina】、【Marcia WenThe lawyer (practice certificate number: 11101202511880410, 11101202411865324, subject to the certificates issued by the judicial administrative authorities) acts on behalf of the client and, based on the provisions of the "Administrative Enforcement Law" and the relevant regulations on expropriation and compensation, confirms that the forced demolition is illegal.

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

  1. Q: Is it illegal for the government to forcibly demolish buildings without providing compensation?
    A: Forcibly demolishing a building without compensation or depositing the compensation funds first violates the principle of "compensation first, relocation later" and the administrative enforcement procedures. The party concerned may file a lawsuit to confirm the illegality of the demolition.
  2. Q: How to sue the government if a commercial building is forcibly demolished?
    A: Collect evidence such as property ownership certificates, demolition notices, and police reports, and hire an administrative lawyer to file an administrative lawsuit to confirm that the forced demolition is illegal.
  3. Q: Can emergency avoidance of danger be used as a justification for forced demolition?
    A: Geological disaster-related regulations generally only authorize the forced evacuation of people, but do not include the forced demolition of houses. Therefore, such forced demolitions often lack legal basis.
  4. Q: Can I get compensation if the forced demolition is illegal?
    A: After confirming the violation, you can continue to claim administrative compensation and request compensation for property losses.
  5. Q: When will the Beijing demolition and relocation lawyers get involved?
    A: Intervene as early as possible before and after the forced demolition, fix the evidence, file an administrative lawsuit, and lay a foundation for subsequent compensation.