Guangzhou lawyer Zhang Jing answered: construction land does not mean that the transfer contract must be valid, it must be obtained from the approval procedures for the conversion of agricultural land or the approval of construction land planning approval for collective management construction land transfer contract can be valid, in layman's terms, it is necessary to perform legal construction procedures. If you want to build a house on collective land, you need to go through the legal construction application procedures, and it is impossible not to go through the construction application procedures just because the nature of the land is collective construction land. In the following case, the court held that because the collective land was transferred to another person to build a house, the formalities for changing the nature of the land to collective construction land were not completed, so the land transfer contract was invalid and the land was returned.
Excerpt from the verdict:
The court issued a Letter of Assistance in Investigation to the Guangzhou Municipal Bureau of Planning and Natural Resources to investigate the situation of the plots involved in the six related cases, and the Bureau replied to the court with a Reply on Assistance in Inquiry, informing the court that the six plots had been adjusted and improved in the "Baiyun District Land Use Master Plan (2010-2020)", "Baiyun District Functional Area Land Use Master Plan (2013-2020)" and "Baiyun District Functional Area Land Use Master Plan (2013-2020)" Zhongjun is planned as construction land, and since October 2006, it has been road land, of which part of the plot of No. 12, No. 16, No. 18 and No. 10 of a street involves an area to be planned in a certain areaThe current status of land use is all construction land, and the "Collective Land Ownership Certificate" has been obtained, and the right holder is a farmer collective of an economic association in Baiyun District, Guangzhou City, and there is no approval for agricultural conversion, "Construction Land Notice", "Construction Land Planning Permit", "Construction Land Approval", "Construction Project Planning Permit", property rights registration records, etc
The main focus of the dispute in this case is: whether the transfer contract (signed in 2006) involved in the case should be confirmed as invalid The first paragraph of Article 44 of the Land Management Law (amended in 2004) stipulates that "if the land occupied for construction involves the conversion of agricultural land into construction land, the approval procedures for the conversion of agricultural land shall be completed." "The Transfer Contract involved in the case clearly stipulates the relevant parameters and standards for the construction of buildings, and it is obvious that the land involved in the case is used for non-agricultural construction purposes, and the land involved in the case has not yet gone through the approval procedures for the conversion of agricultural land, so the Transfer Contract involved in the case is invalid because it violates the mandatory provisions on legal effect. In the absence of evidence to prove that the land involved in the case was collective management construction land, Yang's argument that the current state laws and policies to encourage collective land to enter the market should be applied to determine that the contract was valid lacked factual and legal basis, and this court did not support it.