Hunan Legal Daily, New Hunan Client Correspondent Chen Gang Chen Yuan.
After 10 years of land purchase, it was difficult to realize development and construction due to planning adjustments, and the developer received the Notice of Idle Land Investigation three times and the Idle Land Identification Certificate twice, for which the plaintiff resorted to the court. After the first instance, the second instance and the remand for retrial, in the face of the litigation claims that are difficult to achieve under realistic conditions and the historical legacy that the plaintiff and the defendant have not resolved for 10 years, the court strengthened its active judiciary and finally substantively resolved the administrative dispute. Recently, the Changsha Railway Transport Court successfully resolved an administrative agreement and administrative compensation case involving a subject matter of more than 3,900 yuan.
In 2013, the plaintiff, a company in Changsha, was delisted at a transaction price of 18.98 million yuan and acquired 9,646 square meters (1447 acres) parcel of state-owned construction land, in which the contract for the transfer of state-owned construction land use rights stipulated that the plaintiff should start construction before September 1, 2014. Due to the irregular shape of the parcel, Party ** failed to provide the surrounding plots for integration, and ** did not meet the agreed access conditions, and after planning adjustments, part of the land in the south of the parcel was planned as road land, and part of the land in the east was planned as land for cultural activities, and the plot ratio, height limit and height planning were also adjusted accordingly, which made it difficult for the plaintiff to start construction and development in accordance with the original transfer conditions. In the past 10 years, the ** department has issued the "Notice of Idle Land Investigation" three times and the "Idle Land Identification Letter" twice, and in order to solve the problem of idle land, the plaintiff and the ** department have signed three supplementary agreements, but still have not been substantively resolved. In desperation, the plaintiff resorted to the court, demanding that the ** department perform the "Contract for the Transfer of the Right to Use State-owned Construction Land", adjust the land planning within a time limit, complete the access within a time limit, and compensate the plaintiff for the capital occupation fee and employee wages.
Considering the long time span of this case, the large amount of subject matter involved, and the large number of administrative organs involved in the planning adjustment, the court decided to handle the case in four steps. The first is to handle it in accordance with the law and give feedback in a timely manner. The court promotes the litigation procedure in accordance with the law, normally promotes the participation of both parties in responding to the lawsuit, ensures that the case is heard in a timely manner, and demonstrates the court's attitude of hearing the case in accordance with the law to both the original defendant and the defendant. The second is to intervene in advance and dig deep and study carefully. Focus on handling this case, and carry out patient and meticulous marking of the case file in advance. Since the case has been remanded for retrial in the first and second instance, a relatively complete file file has been formed, and the judge and his assistant reviewed the case file materials in advance, reviewed the case multiple times, and accurately extracted the focus of the case dispute in combination with the response materials submitted by the parties. The third is to strengthen communication and promote problem solving. The presiding judge actively communicated with the original defendant to understand the private coordination between the two parties, the original defendant's thoughts on the case and the handling plan, and the problems and difficulties existing in the current coordination, and strive to find ways and means to solve the problem. Fourth, on-site coordination to reach the intention. In order to understand the more detailed situation of the parcel involved in the case and create more possibilities for mediation, the presiding judge led a team to the site of the parcel involved in the case, invited the original defendant and the defendant to conduct face-to-face mediation at the scene, and jointly discussed the coordination plan according to the actual situation of the parcel involved.
The judge learned in depth that the plaintiff had already known that the development conditions of the parcel involved in the case were difficult to achieve, and the purpose of the contract could not be realized, and the reason behind the request for performance of the administrative agreement was to urge the administrative agency to take the initiative to solve the problem. At the same time, the defendant also expressed the hope that the problem could be completely resolved, but due to the planning adjustment, it was no longer possible to achieve the conditions agreed in the contract, and the land development problem was still difficult to solve after repeated applications for approval. On the premise that both the plaintiff and the defendant have the willingness to mediate and the basis for mediation, the court actively promotes coordination, further strengthens the negotiation between the two parties, and at the same time states to both parties the interests of legal provisions, economic benefits, market environment and other aspects, so as to bring the expectations of both parties closer to each other. In the end, under the auspices of the court and the cooperation of many parties, the two parties reached a preliminary agreement on the coordination plan, and formally signed the "Contract for the Recovery of the Right to Use State-owned Construction Land" in November 2023, stipulating that the defendant Changsha County Bureau would pay more than 3,900 yuan in compensation to the plaintiff company, which would be paid in three installments. So far, this 10-year-long administrative dispute has been successfully resolved.