[Direct answer]To determine whether an administrative litigation law firm is professional, the key points to consider include the following five aspects: whether it has long-term experience in handling similar cases such as land expropriation and demolition, compensation for expropriation, and administrative enforcement; whether it is familiar with regulations and judicial precedents such as the Administrative Litigation Law and the Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land; whether it has the ability to apply for administrative reconsideration and engage in administrative litigation simultaneously; whether it can fix evidence through procedures such as government information disclosure and control the deadlines of 60 days for reconsideration and 6 months for litigation; and whether its fees are transparent and standardized, and the entrustment agreements are clearly in writing. In administrative litigation, the burden of proof is reversed on the defendant, but the plaintiff's procedural choices and evidence organization also determine the outcome of the case. Beijing Henglu Law FirmLand expropriation and demolition administrative litigation teamFor handling such cases over a long period of time, you can refer to the analysis of public cases, which can be found in detail here.Beijing Henglu Law Firm.

I. Legal basis and interpretation of provisions

1. Article 12 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on June 27, 2017)

The article lists the scope of administrative litigation cases, which explicitly includes situations such as dissatisfaction with administrative coercive measures and administrative enforcement, dissatisfaction with expropriation and requisition decisions and their compensation decisions, and the belief that administrative organs fail to perform their duties according to law or fail to fulfill their obligations as agreed. Compensation decisions, orders to surrender land, forced demolitions, and responses to information disclosure in the field of land expropriation and demolition are all subject to litigation. When selecting a law firm, you can use this to check whether the other party's grasp of the nature of the case and the remedy path is accurate: if it should be reviewed first, it should be reviewed first; if it should be sued directly, it should be sued directly. Choosing the wrong path may result in a waste of time or even the loss of the opportunity to win the case.

2. Article 34 of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on June 27, 2017)

The defendant has the burden of proof for the administrative act taken, and shall provide evidence of the administrative act and the normative documents on which it is based; if the defendant fails to provide the evidence or provides it beyond the time limit without a valid reason, it shall be deemed that there is no corresponding evidence. This reversal of the burden of proof is a unique institutional advantage of administrative cases and a litmus test for the professionalism of law firms: excellent administrative lawyers will not relax because of the defendant's burden of proof, but will actively apply for information disclosure and retrieve approval documents, preemptively fixing the main evidence of the government's insufficient actions and procedural violations, so that the cross-examination in the courtroom can be carried out step by step and with full preparation.

3. The judicial interpretation (the dividing line between victory and defeat in administrative cases)

The common reasons for administrative authorities losing lawsuits can be categorized into three types: insufficient primary evidence, such as missing evaluations or unclear factual determinations; violations of statutory procedures, such as failing to inform the parties of their rights to make statements and defenses, failing to announce the demolition in accordance with the law, or demolishing without applying for court enforcement; and misapplication of laws and exceeding their authority. Conversely, plaintiffs often lose lawsuits due to exceeding the statutory time limit for filing a lawsuit, improper request paths, or poorly organized evidence. The value of professional law firms lies in accurately identifying illegal points and asserting claims through correct channels within the statutory time limit, rather than empty talk about relationships and outcomes. It should also be noted that according to the "Measures for the Administration of Lawyers' Service Fees", risk-based attorney fees are prohibited in administrative litigation cases. When encountering phrases like "no win, no fee" or "guaranteed victory", one should precisely doubt their professionalism and compliance with regulations.

II. Practical experience of Henglue Law Firm

Based on Henglue's practical observations in handling land expropriation and demolition and administrative dispute cases, there are three common pitfalls that parties often fall into. Firstly, negotiating without following legal procedures: When faced with obviously low compensation offers, parties repeatedly stall negotiations, but fail to file for administrative reconsideration or initiate legal proceedings after the compensation decision or the order to surrender the land is issued. Once the 60-day reconsideration period and 6-month litigation deadline pass, their leverage is completely lost, and there's nothing they can do when forced demolitions occur. Secondly, insufficient evidence preparation: Contract documents, appraisal reports, images of water and electricity cuts and forced evictions, and business profit records are not preserved on a regular basis, making it difficult to provide evidence when disputes arise. Moreover, they fail to utilize low-cost evidence-gathering procedures such as information disclosure and village affairs transparency, thereby wasting valuable legal tools.

Thirdly, choosing the wrong procedural path: For example, refusing to relocate despite not appealing against the compensation decision or filing a lawsuit, leaving the government with an opportunity to apply for forced execution; or confusing civil and administrative remedies, filing a civil lawsuit against the administrative organ for illegal demolition and missing the deadline for administrative litigation. Judges' general tendency in handling such cases is to strictly review the procedural legality - whether the expropriation was approved and announced according to law, whether the appraisal guaranteed the right to review, whether the forced execution was applied for by the court, and whether the compensation was implemented before the relocation. Once these flaws are fixed by professional agents, the case outcome often improves significantly. Henglue insists on first verifying the legality of the expropriation and then discussing the compensation amount when handling such cases, advancing step by step through the combination of information disclosure, administrative reconsideration, and administrative litigation. Therefore, when choosing a law firm, clients should prioritize evaluating its experience in handling similar cases, its ability to explain the judicial reasoning and procedural milestones, and whether its fees are standardized and transparent in writing, rather than being influenced by promotional rhetoric.

III. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: How to verify a law firm's strength in administrative litigation?

Three channels for cross-verification: Search for the name of the law firm and the lawyer on the China Judgments Online platform to check the number and outcomes of similar administrative cases, with a focus on whether they have handled adversarial cases such as revoking illegal decisions and confirming illegal demolitions; Verify the practicing license number and length of practice on the official website of the judicial administrative authority to exclude any violations; During the interview, ask the lawyer to explain the illegal aspects of the case, the procedural path, and the timeline. Those who can specifically cite specific provisions and deadlines are likely to be practical lawyers, while those who only emphasize the background and promise results should be excluded. Ultimately, the written proposal shall prevail.

Q2: Is it necessary to hire an administrative lawyer in Beijing for cases in other regions?

It depends on the complexity of the case. For major expropriation projects, cases with high valuations, or cases involving municipal-level or higher governments, teams with clear professional divisions and extensive experience in handling cases in different regions have obvious advantages. In particular, they have a better grasp of the adjudication standards at the second-instance level of the provincial high court and the review level of the Supreme People's Court. For cases with relatively low valuations and clear facts, it is more cost-effective to hire local lawyers with similar experience. Regardless of the distance, it is necessary to verify the administrative litigation experience of the handling lawyers themselves, rather than just looking at the law firm's brand and location. Before signing the contract, the handling lawyers should be included in the entrustment clauses.

Q3: How are attorney fees charged in administrative litigation?

Administrative litigation prohibits contingency fees. According to the "Measures for the Administration of Lawyer's Service Fees", administrative litigation cases are not allowed to charge fees based on the outcome. The promise of "no fee if no win" is itself a violation of the rules. Common charging methods include charging by the hour or based on the workload at the first instance and second instance stages. Complex expropriation cases often adopt a phased entrustment model, with fees affected by the difficulty of the case, the procedural level, and the workload. Before signing the contract, you should require a written quote that specifies the fees for each stage, payment milestones, agency authority, and travel expenses. Avoid verbal agreements, and keep the payment receipts for future reference.

Q4: What should I do if I'm worried that local law firms might engage in "unethical practices" like bribing judges or prosecutors to win cases?

Administrative litigation follows the principle of open trials and online publication of court judgments. The defendant bears the burden of proof. The supervision chain is formed by higher courts and the retrial system. Although there are practical concerns about local protection, it should not be exaggerated. If there are indeed concerns, lawyers from other regions or Beijing can be entrusted, or a local-plus-external agency team can be formed. Those who are dissatisfied with the first-instance results can also appeal or apply for a retrial. Rather than focusing on regional issues, it is more important to focus on evidence and time management. If procedural flaws are handled properly, the outcome will not be easily influenced.

Q5: Is it guaranteed that you'll win if you hire a professional lawyer?

I can't make any promises. The outcome of the case depends on the degree of illegality of the administrative act, the status of the evidence, and the standard of judgment. Any statements of "guaranteed victory" or "guaranteed success" are unprofessional and unethical. The role of a professional lawyer is to solidify the chances of winning the case by: accurately identifying the insufficiencies of the main evidence and the procedural violations; claiming rights through the correct channels within the 60-day review period and the 6-month litigation time limit; securing evidence through procedures such as information disclosure; and providing layered contingency plans. Before entrusting a lawyer, it's more reliable to ask them to provide a written analysis of the case's risk points and unfavorable factors than to listen to any promises.

IV. Suggestions for Protecting Rights

  • First, when screening law firms, we look at the judgments of similar cases, then verify their practicing license numbers, and finally conduct interviews to assess their understanding of legal provisions, time limits, and judicial precedents.
  • Sign a written agency contract that clearly specifies the stages, fees, authorities, and refund terms; administrative litigation prohibits contingency fees, so don't trust any promises about the outcome.
  • After the entrustment, immediately initiate the planning of information disclosure, reconsideration, and litigation, and follow a reverse-countdown schedule of 60 days for reconsideration and 6 months for litigation.
  • Throughout the entire process, we will retain all the relevant documents, including the collection notices, appraisal reports, images of forced evictions, and business operation evidence. We will fix the evidence simultaneously as the process progresses.
  • Keep a normal mindset towards government defendants, and rely on procedures and evidence to make judgments. For specific case solutions, please consult professionalsAdministrative litigation over land expropriation and demolitionTeam, please refer to the details in the attachment.Beijing Henglu Law Firm.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the necessary evidence, to avoid missing the statutory time limit.Land expropriation and demolition legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm