[Direct answer]After receiving the "Housing Expropriation Compensation Decision", it is necessary to take action within the statutory time limit. Silence is equivalent to giving up. According to Article 46 of the "Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China", if you are not satisfied with the administrative act, you should file a lawsuit within 6 months from the date you know or should have known about it; the application period stipulated in Article 20 of the "Administrative Review Law of the People's Republic of China" (amended and implemented on January 1, 2024) is 60 days. At the same time, according to Article 19 of the "Regulations on Housing Expropriation and Compensation on State-Owned Land" (implemented on January 21, 2011), the compensation for the value of the house shall not be lower than the market price of similar real estate at the date of the announcement of the expropriation decision. If you have any objections to the appraisal, you can apply for a review of the appraisal and expert appraisal. It is recommended to sign for receipt and keep the delivery certificate, then apply for information disclosure to retrieve the appraisal report and compensation plan, and apply for review or litigation within the time limit to request the revocation and order the re-examination.

I. Legal basis and interpretation of provisions

1. Article 46 of the Administrative Litigation Law and Article 20 of the Administrative Review Law (the Administrative Review Law was amended and implemented on January 1, 2024)

The time limit is the most crucial aspect after making a decision. Article 46 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that those who directly file a lawsuit with the court shall file within six months from the date they know or should have known about the administrative act; Article 20 of the Administrative Review Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the time limit for applying for administrative review shall be within 60 days. You can choose either of the two time limits, but once the time limit expires, the case may not be accepted, and you will only have to rely on the administrative organ to correct its own mistakes, which will significantly increase the difficulty.

2. Article 19 of the Regulations on the Acquisition and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land (effective as of January 21, 2011)

The regulation stipulates that the compensation for the value of the expropriated house shall not be lower than the market price of similar real estate at the date of the announcement of the expropriation decision; the value of the house shall be evaluated and determined by a real estate price evaluation agency with corresponding qualifications in accordance with the evaluation methods for house expropriation; if the evaluation results are disputed, the party concerned may apply for a review of the evaluation, and if there are still objections, the party concerned may apply to the real estate price evaluation expert committee for appraisal. In practice, errors in the evaluation time point, illegal procedures for selecting agencies, and failure to deliver the report in accordance with the law result in the loss of the right to review, which are the three most common reasons for revoking the compensation decision.

3. The interpretation of the practical judgment

The court's review of compensation decisions generally focuses on whether the main evidence is sufficient (whether the appraisal report can be used as the basis for making a decision), whether the procedures are legal (institution selection, public announcement of the results, and delivery of the report), whether the compensation methods are clear and enforceable (whether the property exchange housing sources are genuine, and whether the price and delivery time are clear), and whether the delivery guarantees the right to know (those with valid addresses should be delivered or mailed directly as a priority). If there are defects in any of these aspects, the court may, in accordance with Article 70 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China, rule to revoke the decision and order the institution to make a new decision within a specified time limit.

II. Henglue Law Firm's Real Cases (Detailed Review)

Review of the case:On May 28, 2018, the A District government made a decision on housing expropriation, with the signing period from June 9 to 22 of the same year. Liu Shufen's house was included in the scope of expropriation for the urban renewal of Shuguang Area in A District. Due to the failure to reach an agreement through multiple negotiations, the expropriation process was stalled for a long time. On June 30, 2025, Liu Shufen mailed a "Application for Performance of Resettlement and Compensation Duties", but received no response after it was signed on July 2. Therefore, she applied for administrative reconsideration. On November 6, the municipal government ordered the A District government to perform its duties within 60 days. On December 5, the A District government made a compensation decision, offering monetary compensation and property exchange, but the appraisal price was seriously low and there were no available resettlement houses. Liu Shufen entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for her.\nCheng ChunmeiAttorney,Qiu JuanThe lawyer filed an administrative lawsuit, requesting the revocation of the compensation decision and a new decision on the matter.

The focus of the controversy:First, whether the assessment timepoint is illegal and the price is grossly unfair; Second, whether the property exchange plan is clear and feasible; Third, whether the procedure for making the compensation decision is illegal.

Our position and that of the other party are as follows:The plaintiff requests to revoke the compensation decision and order a redo, specifying the location, layout, and delivery time of the resettlement housing, and re-evaluating it according to the date announced in the expropriation decision. The defendant, the A District Government, argues that the expropriation process is legal, the evaluation agency is selected in accordance with the law, and the content of the compensation decision is legal. However, it only submitted the announcement of selecting the evaluation agency and did not provide evidence on how the evaluation agency was selected.

Attorney's Strategy and Legal Opinions:The attorney reviewed the entire timeline (the launch of the expropriation in 2018, the application for taking office in June 2025, the reconsideration order in November, and the decision made in December), and identified three major violations: Firstly, the evaluation timepoint should be based on the market level as of May 28, 2018, but the defendant used outdated data for the evaluation, failed to prove the legality of the evaluation agency's selection process, and did not officially deliver the evaluation report, depriving the parties of their right to review. Secondly, the property exchange scheme lacked housing sources and had ambiguous pricing, violating the principles of compensation before relocation and protection of trust. Thirdly, the administrative omission preceded the hasty decision-making, and the decision was only announced via public notice, depriving the parties of their right to information. The attorney also assisted in organizing evidence such as household registration books, property ownership certificates, applications for taking office, and reconsideration decisions.

The court's reasoning and the outcome of the case:The court held that, in accordance with the "Measures for the Evaluation of Houses to Be Acquired on State-Owned Land" and other regulations, the acquisition department should ensure that the acquirers participate in the selection of evaluation agencies, publicize the results of household-by-house evaluation, transfer the evaluation reports, and guarantee the right to review and appraise. The defendant only submitted the announcement of selecting evaluation agencies, but failed to provide evidence on how the agencies were selected. Moreover, the defendant claimed that it verbally informed the plaintiffs of the evaluation reports, but the plaintiffs denied this and provided no evidence. This deprived the plaintiffs of the right to review and appraise, and the evaluation reports could not be used as the basis for the compensation decision, which lacked key evidence. In accordance with Article 70 of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the court ruled to revoke the "Announcement on the Compensation Decision for House Acquisition" issued by the A District Government on December 5, 2025, and ordered the defendant to make a new compensation decision within 60 days after the judgment takes effect.

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.程春梅Attorney (Practice Certificate No.: 11101202511071560, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ);\nQiu JuanThe attorney (practice certificate number: 11101201811026953, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

The same schoolZhi Chao LiThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101202311629788, subject to the documents issued by the judicial administrative organ) once handled a case in which the company signed the "Non-Residential Building Demolition and Compensation Agreement" with the village committee, but the village committee failed to fulfill its obligations. The lawyer applied for information disclosure and found that the factory building was not actually within the scope of the demolition. Therefore, he claimed that the signatory party lacked the subject qualification and that signing the agreement under the guise of demolition constituted fraud. The arbitration tribunal ruled that the agreement was invalid in accordance with Article 148 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China and Article 47 of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China, thus eliminating the uncertainty for the parties and preserving their right to claim compensation.

III. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: After receiving the compensation decision, what is the most important thing to do?

This is the deadline for retention. If you disagree with the compensation decision, you should apply for administrative reconsideration within 60 days from the date of receipt, or file an administrative lawsuit within 6 months. Failure to do so may result in the loss of remedial opportunities. At the same time, immediately sign for and keep the delivery certificate (including the mailing number and the signing record), and do not refuse to accept it—the announcement of delivery also has legal effect. It is recommended to simultaneously apply to the expropriation department in writing for the disclosure of the household assessment report and the compensation and resettlement plan, in order to fix the evidence for future claims.

Q2: How to verify the compensation items and standards in the compensation decision?

The four items to be checked one by one are: first, whether the assessment date is the date of the announcement of the expropriation decision, and whether the assessment price is not lower than the similar real estate market price (Article 19 of the Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land); second, whether the housing sources for property rights exchange truly exist, and whether the price and delivery time are clear; third, whether the relocation fees, temporary resettlement fees, and losses from production and business suspension are specified; fourth, whether the social security expenses and resettlement methods have been implemented. Any missing or vague item can be used as a reason to request the revocation of the expropriation decision.

Q3: Is it legal to only announce the decision on compensation for service of documents?

This is usually illegal. When the administrative organ can determine the effective address of the person subject to expropriation, it shall preferentially adopt direct service or mail service; if it directly announces service without exhausting other service methods and deprives the person of the right to information and remedial opportunities, it constitutes a procedural violation. In the case handled by Henglue Law Firm, the attorney specifically cited the administrative organ's failure to take action first, making a hasty decision and only announcing service as one of the procedural violations, which ultimately led to the court's decision to revoke the compensation decision.

Q4: After the compensation decision is revoked, how much money can I still get?

Canceling the decision is just the first step; the key lies in redrafting it. After the court rules to cancel the decision and orders a retrial, the administrative organ shall make a new compensation decision within 60 days from the date the judgment takes effect. At this time, the government should reassess and specify the resettlement housing sources and serve the decision again. Subsequently, they may sign a new compensation agreement through renegotiation, or continue to review the decision after making a new one. In the old city reconstruction case handled by Henglue Law Firm, the court ruled that the A District government must make a new housing expropriation and compensation decision within 60 days after the judgment takes effect.

Q5: What will be the consequences if we neither sign an agreement nor file a lawsuit?

The risks are very high. Once the compensation decision is delivered, it becomes enforceable. If the expropriated person does not apply for reconsideration, file a lawsuit, or move out within the statutory time limit, the municipal or county-level people's government that made the decision may apply to the people's court for compulsory enforcement in accordance with the law (Article 28 of the Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land). At that time, the house may be demolished according to law. Although the expropriated person can claim rights against the enforcement action, it is impossible to restore the original state of the house. Therefore, after receiving the decision, it is necessary to take active measures rather than wait passively.

IV. Suggestions for Protecting Rights and Interests

  • From the date of receiving the compensation decision, record the date of receipt and initiate the review within 60 days or the litigation period of 6 months. Please make sure not to exceed the time limit.
  • Submit a written request for the disclosure of the household assessment report, the materials for the selection of institutions, and the compensation plan, and verify the statutory elements item by item.
  • If you have any objections to the evaluation results, apply for a review of the evaluation and expert appraisal in a timely manner, and keep the proof of delivery and response.
  • The key point is to verify whether the properties offered for exchange are genuine, and whether the delivery time and price are clearly specified, in order to avoid "illusory resettlement".
  • For matters involving enforcement, parties should promptly assert that the actions in question are illegal. For relevant legal basis, please refer to the following document:Land expropriation and demolition｜Legal services for administrative litigation.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with evidence such as ownership materials, compensation decisions, and evaluation reports, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Land expropriation and demolition｜Administrative litigation legal services·Attorney Cheng Chunmei·Attorney Qiu Juan·Beijing Henglu Law Firm