If public housing is expropriated, are the educated youth and their children entitled to share in th

Mondo Social Updated on 2024-01-31

In the case of a dispute over the expropriation of compensation for public housing, whether the parties who return to Shanghai under the policy of educated youth or their children are co-residents of public housing, and whether they are entitled to share in the expropriation compensation?To answer this question, we must first answer two sub-questions: first, how to determine what constitutes the relocation of the household registration due to the policy of returning to Shanghai for the educated youth or the children of the educated youth?Second, does not actually live in the public housing affect the identification of co-occupants of public housing?

1. How to judge the compositionDue to the policy of returning to Shanghai for educated youths or their children to move into the household registration

If it is based on the identity of the educated youth or the children of the educated youth to move back to Shanghai, generally in the police station household registration reason column will record "the children of the educated youth return to the city" (children of the educated youth) or "leave, retire" (the return of the young people to Shanghai), if not so recorded, further inquire about the household registration information of the police station, or personal files, whether there is a similar record of the return of the young people to Shanghai or the return of the children of the educated youth to Shanghai.

Of course, when the educated youth return to Shanghai, they may go to Yunnan or Xinjiang when they go to the mountains and go to the countryside, but when they return to Shanghai, they come back from Hubei or Wuxi and other places, which has no impact, and the key is to look at the record of the reason for moving back to Shanghai or the record of personal files.

In this regard, we can take a look at the views on this part of the case of Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court (2022) Hu 02 Min Zhong No. 10521:

There are disputes between the two parties on the following facts and evidence: 1. Whether Huang Xingmei moved into the household registration in accordance with the policy of returning to Shanghai for educated youths and their children.

Huang Xingmei Fang believed that Huang Xingmei Fang moved into the household registration in accordance with the policy of returning to Shanghai for educated youths and their children, and provided a notice approving Huang Xingmei's transfer to Jingdezhen City, Jiangxi Province.

Huang Xing Soft Fang and ** believe that Huang Xingmei is not a knowledgeable youth, and Huang Xingmei is not returning to Shanghai according to the corresponding policy.

With regard to the above-mentioned evidence provided by Huang Xingmei, it was held that Huang Xingmei could not prove that it had fulfilled the requirements of the notice. The implementation of the policy of returning to Shanghai for educated youths must be marked in the household registration information of returning to Shanghai, and there are resumes in the personal files of educated youths. Judging from the household registration materials in this case, Huang Xingmeifang's household registration moved in from Kunshan City, and the reason for moving in was the family's help to settle down, not from XX Township and XX Town to move back to the city, which is not in line with the situation of educated youths returning to Shanghai. Huang Xingyun and Xu Shunlin believe that even if the notice is genuine, it can only prove that Huang Xingmei went to Jiangxi Province because she went to the countryside, and Huang Xingmei did not return to Shanghai from Jiangxi Province in accordance with the policy of educated youth, but moved back from Kunshan Factory C. Huang Xingmei did not submit household registration materials to prove that she belonged to the educated youth returning to Shanghai. Huang Xingruan and Peng Yue did not express cross-examination opinions on this evidence.

In response to the above dispute, the court of first instance held that the evidence submitted by Huang Xingmei was insufficient to prove that she had moved her household registration into the house at issue in accordance with the policy of returning to Shanghai for educated youths and their children.

2. Does the lack of actual residence affect the identification of co-residents of public housing?

If the household registration is moved into public housing according to the policy of returning to Shanghai for educated youths or their children to return to Shanghai, but they have not lived in it or lived there for one year after moving in, are they entitled to a share of the expropriation compensation when the house is expropriated?

If the educated youth or the children of the educated youth return to Shanghai and move in, but do not actually live in Shanghai or have not lived in it for one year, it will not affect the identification of the co-resident, and they have the right to share the expropriation compensation. Because educated youth belong to a special identity and are also a generation that has made special contributions to the country, their right to reside in the city should be guaranteed.

Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court (2022) Hu 02 Min Zhong No. 8901 case interprets the issue of the right of residence of educated youths returning to Shanghai

Yu Xiaoping's household registration was moved from this city to Yunnan, and after retirement, she was registered according to the (separation and retirement) policy, and in the household registration relocation materials of Yu Xiaoping and Liao Ruiqi, it was clearly recorded that Yu Xiaoping was an educated youth, and whether it was from the records of the materials or the statements of both parties on the housing at issue, the housing at issue was related to the house where Yu Xiaoping lived before moving out of the city.

As a generation of young people in the city who have made special contributions, the rights and interests of residence security enjoyed by the educated youth in the city cannot be lost because they cannot actually live in other provinces or cities for a long time, and their household registration is still due to the small size of the house and the inability to actually move in after many years. When Yu Xiaoping left Shanghai as an educated youth, she moved out of her parents' house, and many years later, as a retired educated youth, she moved back based on the policy and the consent of the people in the house, and it is appropriate to determine that she is a co-occupant of the house at issue if she has not expressly waived her rights and interests in housing security.

and the presentation of views in the case of Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court (2022) Hu 02 Min Zhong No. 6195:

Zhang Zirong moved in from other provinces in accordance with the household registration of the Educated Youth Policy, and although he did not live in the house at issue after moving in, he actually lived in a self-purchased house and a non-welfare house, so he could be identified as a co-resident.

After returning to Shanghai as a child of an educated youth, do they have the right to share the expropriation compensation if they first move to another address and then move into the expropriated public housing?

First of all, if the household registration of the educated youth or the children of the educated youth is initially moved to another address instead of the expropriated public housing after returning to Shanghai, and then they move into the expropriated public housing, they will no longer enjoy the special preferential treatment of the "policy for the return of the educated youth or their children to Shanghai", which refers to the requirement of whether they have actually lived in Shanghai for one year.

To put it more bluntly, if the educated youth or the children of the educated youth move into the expropriated public housing involved in the case because of the policy of returning to Shanghai, they are no longer strictly required to live for one year;If the educated youth or their children move to another address after returning to Shanghai, and then move into the expropriated public housing involved in the case, it is required that they must live in the household registration for one year after moving in.

We can first take a look at the case of Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court (2022) Hu 02 Min Zhong No. 1559:

In this case, Xia Qingfu moved his household registration into the Housing at Issue in accordance with the policy of returning educated youths to Shanghai, and actually lived in the Housing at Issue for more than one year, and did not obtain a welfare housing in the city, thus meeting the requirements for co-occupants. Xia Weilin moved his household registration into the Housing at Issue in accordance with the policy of returning to Shanghai for the children of educated youth, and actually lived in the Housing at Issue for more than one year, and did not obtain welfare housing in the city, so he met the requirements for co-residents. Xia Qinggui moved his household registration into the housing at issue in accordance with the policy of returning educated youths to Shanghai, and did not obtain welfare housing in the city, so he met the requirements for co-residents.

Xia Qinggui did not live in Shanghai for a full year after moving in, but he was a registered person who returned to Shanghai for a young man, so he was also recognized as a co-resident if he did not live for a year.

Let's look at the court opinion of the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court (2022) Hu 02 Min Zhong No. 8130 case:

In this case, Yang Weiqiang lived in the Housing at Issue since he was a child, and then moved out of the Housing at Issue due to the intellectual's departure to other places, and then moved back to the Housing at Issue due to the policy, and should be recognized as a co-occupant in accordance with the relevant policies. As for Yang Qingyu, although he is a child of an educated youth, his household registration in the house at issue was not due to the policy of returning to Shanghai, and he did not actually live in the house at issue after moving into the house at issue, so he should not be deemed to be a co-occupant.

After Yang Qingyu's educated youth children returned to Shanghai, their household registration first moved into an address on Fahua Town Road, and then moved into the expropriated public housing, and they did not actually live in the expropriated public housing after moving into the expropriated public housing, so they were not recognized as co-residents.

3. Summary

Educated youths and their children who move into the household registration in accordance with the policy of returning to Shanghai will be reflected in the files of the police station. Regardless of whether they have returned to Shanghai from the province where they originally went to the countryside or from other provinces due to work transfer, as long as they move their hukou into public housing in accordance with the policy of returning to Shanghai, even if they have not actually lived in it, they can be recognized as co-residents and receive a share of the expropriation compensation.

However, if you do not move back to your hukou due to the policy of returning to Shanghai, or if you move to another address first and then move into the expropriated public housing, you need to live in it for one year before you can be recognized as a co-resident.

Well, that's all for today. If you still have any questions about the policy of returning to Shanghai for educated youth and their children, or if you have anything you want to share, please contact us!

We will continue to share more useful legal knowledge.

End of full text).

Related Pages