Case of Wuxi, Jiangsu province: The house within the demolition scope was identified as dangerous house demolition, abusing power

2022-05-31 0 By

In 1997, Mr. Qian of Wuxi, Jiangsu province obtained a piece of land and houses on the ground from a village committee through signing a transfer agreement.About half of Mr. Qian’s land and houses were occupied in 2019 for road construction, and were compensated in 2020.In 2021, the rest of qian’s unused land and houses were also included in the scope of expropriation, but the expropriating unit did not produce the relevant expropriation approval and announcement and other legal documents, and could not clarify the use of the land after demolition.Since Mr. Qian was old, he entrusted his daughter Ms. Qian to handle the demolition related matters. However, the expropriating unit did not fully communicate with Ms. Qian and made a notice of the appraisal of the dangerous house. Before Ms. Qian could ask the reason, the house was immediately demolished.Ms. Qian was confused. The house was intact without any cracks or sinking. How could it suddenly be identified as a dangerous house?And the appraisal report of the dangerous house, Ms. Qian’s family has never seen, the house was so confused by the demolition…Because the previous demolition dispute is solved by Chen Chen lawyer, this time, Ms. Qian found Chen lawyer at the first time, and entrusted the case to Chen lawyer.After handling the case through the analysis of Lawyer Chen, the case has a demolition notice in the first place, in the absence of a compensation agreement and identified the house as dangerous house, and without the application and entrustment of the property owner, by the administrative organ to entrust identification and demolition, can initially judge that the demolition in the name of demolition of dangerous house to achieve the purpose.Lawyer Chen first helped Mr. Qian to file an administrative lawsuit against the demolition. In the process of the lawsuit, the defendant street office provided the dangerous house detection report and relevant evidence.Chen lawyer points out in court, live according to build ministry “city dangerous building management regulation”, only the building safety appraisal orgnaization that estate administration of government of city, county people is in charge of branch to establish has authority to undertake building safety appraisal, and in the appraisal report that issue ought to build “building safety appraisal special chapter”.The defendant street office only provided a testing report made by a testing company, with a “special seal for testing and testing”. Obviously, such a report cannot be used as the basis for determining dangerous buildings.Additional, even if the building is identified as dangerous house according to law, according to “administrative compulsory law” regulation, any administrative organ did not remove dangerous house power compulsively, including street do.Therefore, the demolition of Mr. Qian’s house by the street office is a serious violation of the law.In the end, the court adopted the attorney Chen’s agency opinion, determined that the defendant had exceeded his statutory powers by demolishing Mr. Qian’s house in the name of dangerous house, and confirmed that the defendant’s street office had violated the law by demolishing Mr. Qian’s house.The lawyer said that in the demolition project, in order to speed up the demolition progress, some grass-roots units will demolish the house in the name of demolition of dangerous houses, demolition of illegal construction and other acts.In fact, the Supreme People’s Court (2019) has made it clear in the Administrative decision no. 11659 of the Supreme People’s Court that it is suspected of abusing power to identify the expropriated houses as dangerous houses for demolition within the scope of expropriation.Therefore, when the people’s court decides that the act of forced demolition is illegal, the property owner can also investigate the relevant responsible persons for abusing their power.Of course, the premise is to master sufficient evidence in the process of litigation, to put forward the argument, so as to solve the dispute of demolition compensation more efficiently.