An Empirical Study On The Judicial Relief Of The Expropriated Person’s Failure To Perform The Compensation Agreement

Along with the development of practice,Chinese academics have been discussing administrative contracts or administrative agreements for more than 20 years.The concerns have gradually shifted from macroscopic issues such as the approaches to establish administrative contracts in China to issues closer to practice such as administrative contract relief channels and judicial review methods.Under the framework of current administrative procedural law,there is only "people suing officials" but no "official suing the people".This makes how the administrative agency can remedy their rights when the counterparty of the agreement does not perform the administrative agreement has become a theorical and practical problem that has received widespread attention.Article 24 of The Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Administrative Agreement Cases fixes the relief for non-performance of the administrative agreement by the counterparty of the agreement to the administrative agency’s application for court enforcement.However,such cases still face unsolved issues such as the uncertainty of steps,basis and rules for review.This article focuses on cases where the expropriated person fails to perform the compensation agreement,not only because of the concentration of related cases in practice,but also because the housing expropriation compensation agreement is more prominent in the dual attributes of the administrative agreement than the administrative agreement.Regarding this characteristic,whether the court’s review method should be echoed in non-litigation enforcement cases is a question worthy of discussion.To this end,after sorting out the existing judicial remedies for the counterparty’s failure to perform the administrative agreement and analyzing the particularity of the housing expropriation compensation agreement in the first part,this article has made two efforts.In the second part,through a comprehensive analysis of 297 judgment documents,especially 20 relatively typical cases,it is revealed that the current judicial review of non-litigation enforcement cases of the housing expropriation compensation agreement has the imperfections such as lax review of the application subject,the agreements directly used as basis for applying for enforcement,and the shortness in response to the legality of the administrative agreement.In the final part,based on the particularity of the house expropriation compensation agreement,specific suggestions are made on the improvement of non-litigation enforcement procedures and judicial review methods.In terms of improving the conditions and procedures for the house expropriation department to apply for court enforcement,it is proposed that the first is to clarify that the basis of application for court enforcement is an independent written administrative decision,rather than the expropriation compensation agreements or a reminder;The second is to regulate the subject qualifications of the "housing expropriation department".The third is to actively explore mandatory enforcement in accordance with the agreement.In terms of judicial review methods,it is proposed that the review of non-litigation enforcement of house expropriation compensation agreements should be "closed" to the overall path of litigation review.Specifically,hearing procedures and mediation procedures are applicable,and whether compensation matters are complete and fair Should be the focus of the entity review.