First, the subject of expropriation is illegal.

The plaintiff listed three reasons for the illegal expropriation of this article.

The first reason is that, according to Article 4, Paragraph 1 and Article 8 of the Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land, the subject of housing expropriation is the municipal and county-level people's governments, and the Donghai Community Management Committee is a dispatched agency of the Baishui Municipal Government, not the city- or county-level people's government, and the defendant does not have the qualifications to be the subject of housing expropriation on state-owned land.

In civil litigation, especially in contract law, don't look at the first of the six elements of contract law, the name or name and address of the parties, many people who sign a contract think that this is not important, but they do not know that subject qualification is an important prerequisite for the validity of the contract, and without the legal subject qualification, the entire contract may become an invalid contract, or a contract with undetermined effect. In other words, if the skin does not exist, the hair will be attached?

This is the reason why the Tokai community is the first defendant.

The second reason is even more legitimate, according to the "Baishui City Implementation of the State Council&a;a; ap; ap; lt; Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land&a;a; ap; ap; gt; The second paragraph of Article 2 of the Several Opinions stipulates that if there are more than 600 households subject to expropriation, the municipal people's government shall issue a decision on housing expropriation, and there are 1,326 households in the A1-A7 plot of the Partridge Village Area Control Plan, far exceeding 600 households, and the defendant has no right to issue a decision on housing expropriation.

The third reason is even more interesting, the expropriation decision issued by the defendant stated that if he was dissatisfied with the housing expropriation decision, he should file an administrative lawsuit with the Fengjiang District People's Court, believing that he did not belong to the municipal or county-level people's government, and the defendant had no right to make a housing expropriation decision.

When writing the third reason, Huang Yixi, Shang Luoyu and Kang Mingyang threw a sly smile at each other, when this official document was issued, the Donghai community probably did not ask a public lawyer to approve it, or rather, they did ask a public lawyer to approve it, but the lawyer was not aware of this problem.

If Lu Qingfeng hadn't stood on their opposite side, he should have been happy to answer this question, of course, if they didn't answer, Huang Yixi and the others would have known it.

According to the regulations of the Baishui Prefecture Government, the demolition work and compensation plan are determined and borne by each district.

There are three districts in the old urban area of Baishui Prefecture, namely Dongjiang District, Fengjiang District and Anjiang District, Anjiang District is the suburbs, the land is vast and sparsely populated, and Dongjiang District is the old city, the whole urban area is dilapidated, with the most dilapidated stone houses and brick houses, which is the most in need of demolition and reconstruction.

However, there is a Sanglian Temple in Dongjiang District, which was built in the second year of the Tang Dynasty (686 AD) and has a long history of more than 1,300 years. There are two stone towers in the lotus temple, the local people refer to the east and west towers for short, it is the Zhenguo Tower, Renshou Tower, the two towers are the highest existing pair of stone towers in China, among them, the seven-story stone tower of the East Tower is the highest in Zhenguo, the height is 4827 meters.

In order to protect the historical landscape, the buildings in the old city cannot be higher than the height of the East and West Towers, which does not refer to the horizontal height, but stands in the old city no matter which of the highest places, you can see the East and West Towers, and the fundamental calculation is that this height is below 20 meters in the old city building, which means that the houses rebuilt after the demolition in Dongjiang District cannot exceed six floors.

You must know that the cost of demolition compensation comes from two aspects, one is the profit of the developer's new real estate, but the real estate in the old city has five floors at the highest, according to the plan of one compensation and one, plus the demolition subsidy and rental resettlement compensation costs, even if it is supported by a large number of bungalows, but the developer wants to demolish the old city, not to mention the profit, but I am afraid that the cost is not enough.

In addition, due to the strict planning control of the old city, for example, the southern area of the city is planned as a tourism and cultural area, the public area has increased, and the area of commercial housing has become smaller, so even if the Dongjiang district government has repeatedly mobilized investment and investment, no developer is interested in developing it.

Unless the government finances bear its own burden, it is unlikely that Dongjiang District will solve it on its own, Dongjiang District was originally a residential gathering place, with little commerce and industry, you must know that several old residential areas in and around Zhongshan Road Hutong in Dongjiang District are all stone five-story buildings, which are dilapidated houses according to regulations, but the Dongjiang District Government does not allow private demolition and construction, and there is no financial resources to support reconstruction, so far there is still no result.

Although the Dongjiang district government moved to the southwestern suburbs in a phase, due to its own lack of capacity and feng shui problems, the area did not develop much, and later the Baishui city government moved to Donghai, and the Dongjiang district government moved back to the old city government office.

This is also the reason why the economic development of Dongjiang District has been slow so far and the progress of regional planning has not been effective.

Fengjiang District is different, Fengjiang District is a new upstart, the land is large, the cost of demolition compensation is not high, and high-rise buildings can be built, and the status in Baishui Prefecture can refer to Pudong in Songjiang Prefecture, so Fengjiang District is rich and rich, not to mention the old place in Dongjiang District, even the buildings of twenty or thirty years ago are almost all demolished and rebuilt.

It can be said that now the entire Fengjiang District has a new look, and only Partridge Village is missing.

Whoever pays pays speaks, and every time Fengjiang District is demolished, a community demolition headquarters is set up, which is attached to the community management committee. Because of this, Fengjiang District did not realize at all that they did not have this subject qualification.

Second, the applicable laws and regulations of the expropriation decision are incorrect.

According to the four limits of compensation for expropriation announced in the Decision, the entire area of Partridge Village is within the scope of the above-mentioned expropriation, but the composition of this land is complex, the streets and the houses on both sides are state-owned land, and the rest of the place is rural homesteads, which are collective land in nature, and the defendant applied the law and regulations in error to expropriate the houses on the collective land in accordance with the Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land.

The expropriation decision and announcement issued by the Donghai Community Management Committee did not split the nature of the state-owned land and the plots of the collective land, and there were both state-owned land and collective land in the same expropriation decision, and on the premise that the collective land had not been legally expropriated and the nature of the land was changed, the houses on the state-owned land were directly expropriated, which violated the legal procedures for the expropriation of rural collective land and its attachments as stipulated in the Land Management Law, and the laws and regulations were wrong.

Third, the procedure for the expropriation decision was illegal.

The first point is that the defendant expropriated the house on the grounds of dilapidated house renovation, but the dilapidated house renovation project was not included in the annual plan for national economic and social development of Baishui City, nor did it widely solicit public opinions, and the construction activities that really need to expropriate houses in violation of Article 9 of the Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-owned Land should be in accordance with the national economic and social development plan, the overall land use plan, the urban and rural plan and the special plan. The construction of affordable housing projects and the reconstruction of old urban areas shall be included in the annual plans for national economic and social development at the city and county levels. The formulation of national economic and social development plans, overall land use plans, urban and rural plans, and special plans shall be subject to extensive public opinion and scientific argumentation.

。