[Case Summary]This case involves an administrative review of the collective land expropriation (confirming the illegality of forced land clearance and seeking compensation). Li Yong, a villager in City A, obtained the right to contract and operate 3.56 mu of collective land in 1999. In 2025, he did not sign a compensation agreement or receive the compensation during the expropriation, and his contracted land, seedlings, and attached structures were forcibly cleared on November 24, 2025. Li Yong entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Zhang WeiThe lawyer applied for administrative reconsideration to the People's Government of H City. The reconsideration organ adopted the lawyer's opinion, confirmed that the forced clearance of land by the People's Government of A City was illegal, and helped the party concerned obtain satisfactory compensation. The core dispute is whether the failure to make a decision on land expropriation compensation and resettlement, and the forced clearance without applying for court enforcement, constitute procedural violations and should be compensated. Applicable laws: Article 47 and Article 62 of the Land Management Law, Article 13 of the Administrative Enforcement Law, and Legal Interpretation [2024] No. 8, etc.

I. Review of the case

"What should I do if my contracted land is forcibly cleared without compensation?" and "Should compensation be provided first or the land be cleared first during collective land expropriation?" are frequent concerns among villagers. Li Yong, a villager of Shuguang Village, XX Town, A City, legally obtained the right to contract and operate 3.56 mu of collective land in 1999 and has been growing poplar and peach trees there for a long time. In 2025, the A City People's Government initiated expropriation and issued the "Land Expropriation Announcement" and the "Land Expropriation Compensation and Resettlement Plan Announcement". Li Yong's contracted land was included in the scope of expropriation, but the two sides never reached an agreement on compensation, and Li Yong neither signed the agreement nor received the compensation. On the morning of November 24, 2025, without Li Yong's knowledge or notification, the seedlings and attached structures on his contracted land were forcibly torn down and removed, and the land was forcibly occupied. After Li Yong reported the case to the police, the police said that the land expropriation dispute had not been resolved, so he had no choice but to entrust Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Zhang WeiThe lawyer, on behalf of the client, applied for administrative reconsideration to the People's Government of H City, requesting that it confirm the illegality of the forced clearance and order the party concerned to make compensation.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: The subject and responsibility of forced clearance of construction sites.It is unclear who the main subject of the forced demolition is, and whether the respondent, as the organizer of the expropriation, is a suitable subject of liability.
  • Focus Two: Is the forced eviction procedure legal?Is it a serious procedural violation to carry out forced demolitions without making a compensation and resettlement decision, and without applying for court enforcement?
  • Focus Three: Is the compensation request supported?Output: What should we do when the government forcibly clears land without providing compensation, and how should we handle the coexistence of administrative compensation and compensation in such cases?

III. Professional intervention by Hengluo Law Firm

The applicant (Li Yong) claimed that:Li Yong claimed that he had been operating the contracted land legally for many years, but was forcibly cleared of the land without signing an agreement or receiving compensation, which seriously infringed his legitimate rights and interests. He requested that the court confirm that the forced land clearance was illegal and order the defendant to compensate for the losses.

The respondent (the A City government) argued that:The municipal government of A City stated that the expropriation has been approved and the procedures are legal, and the compensation fees have been allocated to the village collective economic organizations. Li Yong refused to sign and accept the compensation because he was dissatisfied with the standards. The administrative authorities have the right to proceed with the expropriation according to law, and the forced clearance of the land is legal. Therefore, the municipal government requests to reject the appeal application.

Hengluo Lawyer's Agency Opinion:Zhang WeiThe lawyer comprehensively reviewed the evidence and accurately applied the law: First, the subject presumption. The respondent is the organizer and implementer of the land expropriation, and should be presumed to be the responsible subject according to law; Second, the procedural violation and the demolition before compensation. According to the Land Management Law, the Administrative Enforcement Law, and the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Administrative Enforcement (No. 8 of 2024), the respondent failed to make a decision on land expropriation compensation and resettlement and did not apply for court enforcement before demolishing the houses on its own, which constitutes a serious procedural violation and exceeds its authority. On the basis of confirming the violation, the respondent should be compensated.

  • The land contract management right certificate serves to lock in the legal right to operate the land and the actual situation of the crops grown on it
  • The allocation of compensation funds does not equal the fulfillment of compensation responsibilities, and refusing to accept the compensation cannot exempt one from the obligation to provide compensation
  • It is pointed out that the compensation process involves the issue of restitution, and the two are not mutually exclusive

IV. Outcome of the case

After accepting the application, the People's Government of H City applied the ordinary procedure and identified two key issues: First, the legality of the forced clearance of the table - the respondent admitted in its reply that it carried out the clearance of the table, and failed to make a compensation and resettlement decision without reaching an agreement, and did not apply for court enforcement to forcibly clear the table on its own, which violated the provisions of the Land Management Law and the Administrative Enforcement Law, and constituted a serious procedural violation and exceeded its authority. It supported the request to confirm the illegality. Second, the compensation request - the compensation for the aboveground attachments and seedlings belongs to the owner. The respondent's claim that the funds were already in place and the applicant refused to accept the compensation cannot be established, and the respondent has not yet fulfilled its compensation obligation. The review confirmed that the forced clearance of the table was illegal, and prompted the parties to obtain satisfactory compensation.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

The collective land expropriation shall follow the principle of "compensation first, expropriation later". In the event that the contracted land is illegally cleared and there is no compensation, the parties concerned shall promptly entrust professional lawyers to confirm the illegality through administrative reconsideration or litigation and claim compensation. This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm [Zhang WeiThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101202311579912, subject to the documents issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts on behalf of the client, relying on the Land Administration Law and the Administrative Enforcement Law, to confirm that the forced clearing of the table is illegal and to safeguard the client's rights and interests.

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

  1. Q: What should I do if my contracted land is forcibly cleared without compensation?
    A: Collect the land contract certificates, photos of the clearance table, and police reports. Hire a lawyer to apply for administrative review or litigation, confirm the violation, and claim compensation.
  2. Q: Should the compensation be paid first or the land clearance be carried out first in the process of collective land expropriation?
    A: Compensation should be provided first, followed by expropriation. If compensation is not provided and no application is made for court enforcement before expropriation, it is a serious procedural violation.
  3. Q: Does transferring the compensation money to the village collective mean that the compensation has been completed?
    A: No. If no agreement has been reached with the rights holder and no compensation decision has been made in accordance with the law, the compensation obligation cannot be waived.
  4. Q: Can Qiang Qing get compensation after committing a crime?
    A: After confirming the violation, both administrative compensation and compensation coexist, and you can claim compensation for the loss of young crops and attached objects on the ground.
  5. Q: When will the lawyers handling demolition and relocation cases in Beijing get involved?
    A: Intervene as early as possible before and after the clearing of the site, fix the evidence, initiate a review or litigation, and push for compensation.