[Case].
On January 5, 2008, the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee was established and registered with a land and housing management bureau. On January 22, the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee held a general election of members. The part of the first owners' committee was changed, and the second Dongze Garden owners' committee was established. The Housing Authority will make changes to the registration of the committee after the change.
On January 12, 2008, the Owners Committee of Dongze Garden signed a contract with Guangzhou Dongze Property Management and this fold (hereinafter referred to as Dongze Property Company) It was agreed that Dongze Property Company would manage the property of Dongze Garden, and the management period was from February 2008 to February 28, 2010 until March 2010, and the second Dongze Garden Owners' Committee after the change of residence decided to re-appoint the Property Management Service Division, published an advertisement in the newspaper for the recruitment of the property service company, and wrote to Dongze Property Company to participate in the bidding, and after receiving the notice, Dongze Property Company sent a letter to the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee, indicating that the owners' committee's public bidding was not authorized by the owners' meeting, was not representative, and was not legal, and it did not participate; At the same time, it also stated that it did not recognize the subject qualification of the second Dongze Garden Owners' Committee. After public bidding, the third party, Guangzhou United Development Property Management Company (hereinafter referred to as Lianfa Property Company), won the bid, and the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee signed the "Property Service Contract" with it, agreeing that from May 1, 2010 to May 1, 2012, Lianfa Property Company will carry out property management of Dongze Garden. However, Dongze Property Company refused to withdraw and hand over the property management materials after the contract expired, resulting in many conflicts between the two property management companies. Dongze Hua filed a lawsuit with the court as the plaintiff because the owners' committee was the plaintiff, requesting that the defendant Dongze Property Company be ordered to immediately withdraw from the management site of Dongze Garden and transfer the property management rights to Lianfa Property Company. Lianfa Property Company participated in the litigation as a third party.
The defendant Dongze Property Management Company argued that in the general election of the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee, the number of owners participating in the voting did not reach 50% of the required number and could not be used as valid votes, and the second Dongze Garden Owners' Committee elected by the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee was illegal, and the Housing Authority's registration and filing of the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee was illegal. Yang, the owner of Dongze Garden, filed an administrative lawsuit with the court. The court was requested to order the Housing Authority to revoke the registration of the second owners' committee. The court was requested to rule to suspend the trial of the case. After the final judgment of the administrative litigation case, the trial of the case will continue on the basis of the trial results. The property service contract signed between the plaintiff and the defendant had expired, and the plaintiff's owners' committee had no right to file a lawsuit for the transfer of property management rights and requested the court to dismiss its claim.
After the trial, the court held that the plaintiff Dongze Garden Owners' Committee had been established by the land and housing management department in 2008 and had received the organizational structure**, and the plaintiff should be deemed to have legal organizational qualifications since 2008. On March 11, 2010, the land and housing management department of a certain district registered and filed the change of members of the second Dongze Garden Owners' Committee after the change of office, which was the review and approval of the change registration of the members of the owners' committee after the change of office, rather than the change registration of the owners' committee. Therefore, although the owner Yang filed an administrative lawsuit on the grounds that the re-election procedure was illegal, the issue was that he was dissatisfied with the change of registration and filing of the members of the second Dongze Garden Owners' Committee, not the lawsuit against the establishment of the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee. Therefore, even if the administrative litigation case revokes the change of registration filed by the land and housing management department of a certain district on March 11, 2010, it will not affect the existence of the Dongze Garden Owners' Committee. Therefore, the outcome of the administrative lawsuit filed by Yang Liyu has nothing to do with this case, and does not belong to the circumstances where the litigation must be suspended by law.
Now that the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant has expired and terminated naturally, according to the provisions of relevant laws and regulations, the defendant should transfer the property management rights of Dongze Garden, and its refusal to transfer has constituted infringement and hindered the normal management order of Dongze Garden. The judgment is as follows: The defendant should immediately release the site of the management of Dongze Garden and hand over the site, facilities and relevant information of the property management of Dongze Garden to Lianfa Property Company.
The change of internal members resulting from the general election of the second Dongze Garden Owners' Committee will not affect the main qualification of the owners' committee, and the trial should not be suspended. After the termination of the property service contract, the owners' committee has the right to require the defendant to complete the handover procedures for the property.