How to determine the nature of the house involved and the scope of compensation.
Address: North of Suzhi Road, Sucheng District, Suqian City, Jiangsu Province.
The house of the retrial applicant is located in rural areas and is built on homestead.
Article 32 of the State Compensation Law of the people’s Republic of China stipulates that “the main form of state compensation is the payment of compensation.
If the property can be returned or restored to the original state, the property shall be returned or restored to the original state.” according to the facts found in the original trial, the people’s Government of Jiangsu Province issued SZD (2011) No.
Zhang Chenghu applied to the court for retrial and requested to revoke the judgments of first and second instance to support his claim.
The court of first instance appointed Zhang Chenghu to pay the replacement price of the house involved A qualified appraisal company was entrusted to appraise the house involved.
Therefore, Zhang Chenghu’s request to restore the house involved to its original state has no legal basis and is objective No.
According to the facts found in the original trial, the house involved was rebuilt in 2004, not the house built and used in rural villages and market towns before the regulations on the administration of building land in villages and towns implemented on February 13, 1982, nor the land administration law of the people’s Republic of China on January 1, 1987 Before the implementation, the houses applicable to the present day were built in the urban area before the implementation, so the houses involved are not unlicensed houses with incomplete procedures due to historical reasons.
The review has been completed.
In addition, there is a fault that the houses involved in Zhang Chenghu’s construction were not approved by land use and planning approval.
Entrusted agent ad litem: Mo Lixian, lawyer of Beijing Jingrun law firm.
After Zhang Chenghu refused to appeal, the higher people’s Court of Jiangsu Province made the administrative compensation judgment (2017) Suxing Suizhong No.
The land involved in the case is still idle and unused, and the relevant land use planning and approval procedures have not been handled, so it is possible to restore the original state; 4.
482 on November 7, 2011 Reply on the 6th batch of urban construction land in 2011 in Sucheng District, Suqian City , agreed to expropriate the collective land, including the land involved.
☑ For the formation of illegal buildings, it shall not only comply with the relevant provisions of Article 32 of the original urban planning law of the people’s Republic of China and Article 40 of the urban and rural planning law of the people’s Republic of China, handle the construction project planning permit and other relevant approval procedures, but also comprehensively consider the construction age, construction reasons and the fault of the builder.
On December 30, 2016, the intermediate people’s Court of Suqian City, Jiangsu Province made an administrative compensation judgment (2015) Suzhong Xing Bao Chu Zi No.
The formalities are incomplete due to historical reasons, so it should not be recognized as illegal construction; 2.
☑ Judgment document administrative ruling of the Supreme People’s Court of the people’s Republic of China (2018) supreme law Xing Shen No.
Based on the basic situation of the house recorded in the house survey and survey form of Sucheng District, Suqian City, the appraisal was carried out according to the replacement price, and the value was 149929 yuan.
00001 in the case of retrial applicant Zhang Chenghu v.
Zhang Chenghu still disagreed and applied to the court for retrial within the statutory time limit.
In addition, the party involved in the construction of the house involved in the case was at fault without land use approval and planning approval.
Legal representative: Ma Wenyi, director.
The court held that I.
However, it should be considered that the party involved in the construction of the house involved has a certain connection with the demolition of its legal house, and has lived for many years after the completion of the house.
The appraisal time point was the time when the illegal act of forced demolition was confirmed by the effective legal documents.
If the compensation standard for house value determined in the first and second instance is too low, compensation shall be made with reference to the implementation of the compensation standard for house expropriation on state-owned land; 5.
As mentioned earlier, the house involved belongs to illegal construction.
Its use of the land involved in the case has been approved, and the house of the retrial applicant has been built for a long time.
However, for the formation of illegal construction, we should comprehensively consider the construction age, construction reasons and the fault of the builder.
Therefore, the house involved in the case is not an unlicensed house with incomplete procedures due to historical reasons.
The identification of illegal buildings must be handled by the competent authority through legal procedures.
The main reasons are as follows: 1.
The illegal act of forced demolition by the administrative organ has indeed caused certain losses to the party concerned.
2.
The appraisal report The assessment procedure is legal, and the assessed value can be used as the basis for determining the house loss..
Respondent (defendant of first instance and appellee of second instance): People’s Government of shuangzhuang Town, Sucheng District, Suqian City (now shuangzhuang sub district office).
Therefore, based on the above considerations, the court of first instance ruled that shuangzhuang town government should be liable for the loss of Zhang Chenghu’s house according to the replacement price, that is, it was not improper to compensate Zhang Chenghu for the construction materials and labor costs of building the house.
the respondent people’s Government of shuangzhuang Town, Sucheng District, Suqian City (hereinafter referred to as shuangzhuang town government).
In this case, although Zhang Chenghu provided the house homestead use right certificate and demolition compensation agreement issued in the 1990s, the above certificate is not valid It can only be proved that the house demolished by Zhang Chenghu in 2002 is a legal house.
whether there is a legal basis for Zhang Chenghu’s request to restore the house involved to its original state.
If they cannot be demolished, their physical objects or illegal income shall be confiscated and a fine may be imposed.
6 on March 6, 2018, rejected the appeal and upheld the judgment of first instance.
However, it should be considered that the houses involved in Zhang Chenghu’s construction are related to the demolition of their legal houses in 2002, and the houses have been occupied after completion After living for ten years, the illegal act of forced demolition by shuangzhuang town government did cause some losses to Zhang Chenghu.
At the same time, the land involved has been included in the urban planning area in 2003, so it is in the city The new construction, expansion and reconstruction of buildings and structures within the municipal planning area shall comply with Article 32 of the original urban planning law of the people’s Republic of China and the urban and rural planning law of the people’s Republic of China In this case, the shuangzhuang neighborhood committee where Zhang Chenghu is located and the subordinate Zhang Liu group issued a certificate confirming that Zhang Chenghu’s original house was demolished in 2002 due to the construction of small towns by the government.
On November 16, 2011, Suqian land and resources network announced the 6th batch of land expropriated in Sucheng District in 2011, and then shuangzhuang town government organized the land expropriation compensation and resettlement of the plot, so the land involved has been expropriated as state-owned.
As compensation, the shuangzhuang village committee and the subordinate Zhang Liu group agreed to place Zhang Chenghu’s Homestead in Zhang Chenghu Zhang Chenghu started building houses in the urban planning area in 2004 without going through the corresponding planning examination and approval procedures, and the land used by the houses did not obtain the legal land use right certificate in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3, Article 62 of the land administration law of the people’s Republic of China, so the houses involved in the case are illegal buildings.
The first and second instance identified the houses involved as illegal buildings without factual and legal basis; 3.
The court has formed a collegial panel with judge Bai Yali as the presiding judge and presiding judges, and judges Geng Baojian and Wang Xiaobin to review the case.
5832 retrial applicant (plaintiff of first instance and appellant of second instance): Zhang Chenghu, male, born on February 13, 1973, Han nationality, living in Sucheng District, Suqian City, Jiangsu Province.
The house involved in the case is not the house built and used in rural villages and market towns before the regulations on the administration of building land in villages and towns implemented on February 13, 1982, nor the house built in urban areas before the implementation of the land administration law of the people’s Republic of China on January 1, 1987.
If the house involved in the case is uninhabitable due to the respondent’s behavior, it shall compensate for the rental fee, lawyer’s fee and other expenses.
The original urban planning law of the people’s Republic of China Article 40 Urban and rural planning law of the people’s Republic of China Article 64 clearly stipulates that those who fail to obtain the construction project planning permit or carry out construction in accordance with the provisions of the construction project planning permit and are unable to take corrective measures to eliminate the impact shall be demolished within a time limit.