Lawyer handling case | Who should be awarded the 25 million yuan payment, whether it is for demolition and relocation or for fulfilling the contract?
A gentleman loves wealth and takes it wisely; A plot of land in a certain district is required for demolition and relocation; The real estate developer has decided to sign a contract with Xianghe Real Estate Company for a target of nearly 20 million yuan; The local village committee believes that the payment should belong to the category of demolition and relocation funds; The so-called land compensation refers to the compensation for the losses incurred by landowners and land users due to the state's expropriation of land and their investment and income in the land; Should the subject matter of the contract signed between the developer and Xianghe Real Estate Company belong to the demolition and relocation funds? Both sides have tried to negotiate multiple times without success, and can only discern right from wrong through verbal arguments in court; The disputed amount involved in this case has a principal and interest of up to 25 million yuan; The two parties involved in the dispute are the local village committee and Xianghe Real Estate Company. Who will receive the huge amount involved in the case?
Xianghe Company sought help from Li Xiaohua Law Firm due to its reputation; Li Xiaohua Law Firm attaches great importance to it; The team conducted repeated research and hired senior experts in civil and commercial law to provide targeted suggestions; So a senior lawyer was appointed to represent this case. After the first instance judgment was issued, the plaintiff was dissatisfied with the judgment and appealed. Can the appellate court hear the opinions of the appellate lawyer and will the first instance judgment be changed? rub one's eyes and wait!
Brief description of the case
Plaintiff: Village Committee
Defendant: Xianghe Real Estate Company
Third party: Demolition developer
Cause of action: Three parties involved in a dispute over the principal and interest of 25 million yuan, the first instance court accepted the case and applied ordinary procedures to form a collegial panel for public hearing. The lawyers hired by both the plaintiff and defendant appeared in court to participate in the litigation.
Controversy Focus
Regarding the focus of the dispute: The plaintiff believes that the land involved should belong to the village committee and enjoy land ownership. Therefore, the village committee has the right to claim the demolition and relocation funds obtained from the land. Lawsuit request: The defendant Xianghe Real Estate Company shall return the total principal and interest of 25 million yuan paid by the third-party developer to the defendant for the demolition and relocation, which belongs to the collective.
Lawyer's opinion
As a senior lawyer at Shanghai Li Xiaohua Law Firm, I carefully reviewed the case documents and provided professional opinions in accordance with relevant laws and regulations.
Proxy Opinion
1. The plaintiff's subordinate collective land has been lawfully requisitioned and has obtained all benefits and compensation in accordance with legal procedures and standards. The plaintiff's claim that the defendant should return the principal and interest of 25 million yuan for demolition and relocation has no factual or legal basis and should be rejected by judgment. The amount of demolition and relocation shall be determined only in accordance with the standards determined by the demolition and relocation party, and cannot be determined by mutual agreement between any parties outside of demolition and relocation; Apart from the "land compensation fee" determined in the government's resettlement compensation plan, no "demolition and relocation fees" should be incurred; Any mutually agreed upon fees are not within the scope of statutory 'land compensation fees'.
2. Shanghai Xianghe Real Estate Company is a legally registered entity that independently assumes civil rights and obligations in accordance with the law. The Joint Development Agreement signed between Xianghe Company and a third-party developer meets the requirements for contract effectiveness stipulated in the Civil Code and should be recognized as legal and effective in accordance with the law; The demolition and relocation fees under the Joint Development Agreement are the corresponding legal consideration for Xianghe Company to fulfill its contractual obligations and provide assistance in development and construction services to third-party developers. The plaintiff claims that the "development benefit fees" lack factual and legal basis.
3. The third-party developer confirmed the Joint Development Agreement during the trial and confirmed that the defendant Xianghe Real Estate Company had fulfilled all obligations under the agreement, confirming the defendant Xianghe Company's claim that the Joint Development Agreement was legal, valid, and actually fulfilled; The third-party developer also denies having reached an agreement with the plaintiff regarding the demolition and relocation funds, proving that the basis for the plaintiff's lawsuit is fundamentally unfounded.
4. The evidence submitted by the plaintiff's village committee during the trial cannot prove their litigation claims. The "Explanation of the Situation" and "Proof Letter" do not meet the requirements of the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Litigation" for the form and content of evidence, and therefore do not have probative value.
5. According to the rule of evidence advantage and the principle of high probability; According to the relevant provisions of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the evidence provided by the defendant Xianghe Company to the court in this case is stronger than the so-called "evidence" submitted by the plaintiff in this case to prove that the form and content of its claims are not legal. The plaintiff's claims lack corresponding evidence to prove them, and their claims should not be supported by law. In order to uphold the fairness and justice of the law, the defendant Shanghai Xianghe Real Estate Company requests the court to dismiss the plaintiff's lawsuit request in accordance with the law, in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the defendant unit from infringement.
Court ruling
During the trial, there was a heated debate between the plaintiff and defendant based on the focus of the dispute. The court listened carefully to both parties' opinions and made a judgment after evaluation.
The court holds that
After the court's trial, it was found that the plaintiff's claim against the defendant Xianghe Real Estate Company based on the demolition and relocation costs incurred from the expropriation of land is not qualified on a substantive basis.
From the perspective of contractual relativity, a contract is concluded between the contracting parties, and the terms and conditions only have effect on the contracting parties. Any third party outside the contract cannot enjoy the rights under the contract, and has no right to make claims against any contracting party or demand that any contracting party fulfill its contractual obligations to that third party.
Court ruling
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for the defendant to return the demolition and relocation fee of RMB 10000 and its corresponding interest of RMB 25 million lacks factual and legal basis, and this court does not support it.
Professional interpretation
According to Article 15 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the General Principles of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China on Contracts [2023] No. 13, when determining the rights and obligations between the parties, the people's court should not be confined to the name used in the contract, but should base it on the content agreed upon in the contract. If the rights and obligations claimed by the parties are inconsistent with the rights and obligations determined based on the contract content, the people's court shall determine the actual civil legal relationship between the parties based on the contracting background, transaction purpose, transaction structure, performance behavior, and whether there is a fictitious transaction subject matter.
(Units and individuals in the article are all pseudonyms)