CASE LAW NO. 63/2023/AL On the review of administrative decisions related to the administrative actions under complaint (Please note that this image is not related to the specific case being discussed).

CASE LAW NO. 63/2023/AL

On the review of administrative decisions related to the administrative actions under complaint

Approved by the Judicial Council of the Supreme People’s Court on February 1^st, 2^nd, and 3^rd, 2023, and published under Decision No. 39/QĐ-CA on February 24^th, 2023, of the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court.

Source of the Case Law:

The Cassation Decision No. 04/2018/HC-GĐT dated October 23^rd, 2018, of the Judicial Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng regarding the administrative case “Complaint against administrative decisions, administrative actions related to the enforcement to dismantle structures violating urban planning and claim for compensation due to the enforcement actions” between the plaintiffs, Mr. Lê Hữu T and Mrs. Lê Thị Ngọc L, and the defendant, the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A.

Location of the Case Law’s Content:

Paragraph 15 of the “Court’s Opinion” section.

Summary of the Case Law:

– Case Background:

The plaintiff filed a complaint against an administrative decision and related administrative actions, but only the administrative actions were within the statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit.

– Legal Resolution:

In this case, the court must resolve the lawsuit regarding the administrative actions and has the authority to review the legality of the administrative decision related to the complained administrative actions.

Relevant Legal Provisions:

Article 6 and Article 116 of the Law on Administrative Procedures 2015.

Keywords:

“Statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit”; “Review of related administrative decisions.”

CASE DETAILS

Before the liberation, Mr. Lê Hữu H’s parents, Mr. Lê Hữu T1 and Mrs. Công Tôn Nữ Hạnh D, established a residence with accompanying land situated at 45/266 P Street, Ward A, City H (now identified as Plot 77, Map Sheet 05, covering an area of 234.3m²). Following Mr. T1’s passing in 1976, Mr. H resided with his mother in the aforementioned property until Mrs. D’s demise in 1981. Consequently, Mr. Lê Hữu H and the other inheritors assumed management and utilization of the property. In 2003, Mr. H consented to Mr. T’s occupancy of the residence at 45/266 P Street.

By 2008, a temporary occupancy agreement was formalized between Mr. H and Mr. T, stipulating Mr. H’s prerogative to reclaim the premises with one month’s notice. At the outset of 2009, necessitating the reclamation of the residence, Mr. H duly notified Mr. T within the stipulated time frame. Despite the notification, Mr. T persisted in occupying and utilizing the property, prompting Mr. H to pursue legal recourse via a civil suit to regain temporary residence rights.

In the appellate decision No. 12/2011/DSPT dated December 19^th, 2011, the Appellate Court of the Supreme People’s Court in Đà Nẵng resolved to reject Mr. Lê Hữu T’s appeal and that of the interested party, Mrs. Lê Thị Ngọc L, thereby upholding the initial judgment. The verdict decreed in favor of Mr. Lê Hữu H’s petition to reclaim temporary residence rights against Mr. Lê Hữu T, mandating the return of the property located at 45/266 P Street, Ward A, City H, Thừa Thiên Huế Province, to the heirs of Mr. Lê Hữu T1 and Mrs. Công Tôn Nữ Hạnh D, represented by Mr. Lê Hữu H.

Subsequent to the restitution of the property to the rightful heirs, Mr. Lê Hữu T and his spouse illicitly erected a temporary structure (presently a wooden framework with columns and rafters, spanning 27.2m²) on the family’s land belonging to Mr. H.

On July 22^nd, 2012, the People’s Committee of Ward A documented an administrative violation against Mr. T and order him to cease construction on the unauthorized building. The following day, July 23^rd, 2012, Mr. Lê Hữu H petitioned the People’s Committee of Ward A concerning Mr. Lê Hữu T’s unauthorized construction on his family’s property.

Simultaneously, the People’s Committee of Ward A issued Decision No. 28/QĐ-UBND, on July 23^rd, 2012, to halt the illegal construction, citing urban planning violations, and mandated Mr. T to dismantle the structure within three days. Despite the directive, Mr. T and his spouse persisted in completing the construction beyond the stipulated time frame.

Consequently, on July 26^th, 2012, the People’s Committee of Ward A issued Enforcement Decision No. 30/QĐ-UBND to dismantle the unlawful structure, which contravened urban planning regulations.

Further addressing the matter, on November 22^nd, 2012, the People’s Committee of Ward A issued Notice No. 21/TB-UBND, directing Mr. Lê Hữu T and Mrs. Lê Thị Ngọc L to dismantle the unauthorized temporary structure situated on Mr. Lê Hữu H’s family land. The notice specified compliance with dismantling procedures by December 28^th, 2012. Failure to adhere would result in enforcement action in accordance with applicable legal provisions.

In March 2013, notwithstanding pending enforcement actions by state authorities, Mr. Lê Hữu T’s family proceeded to construct an additional temporary house, additional structures, and a perimeter wall on land not under their lawful possession, without requisite construction permits from competent authorities.

On March 10^th, 2013, the People’s Committee of Ward A issued an administrative violation record against Mr. Lê Hữu T, directing the dismantling of the entire unauthorized structure, temporary house, and fence situated on land not under their lawful use. Subsequently, Decision No. 01/QĐ-UBND dated March 11^th, 2013, was issued to suspend construction of the illegal structure, infringing urban planning regulations at 45/266 P Street, Group 2, Ward A, City H, Thừa Thiên Huế Province, encompassing an area of 28.7m².

Despite repeated urgings from the ward’s People’s Committee, along with official notices mandating compliance, Mr. T’s family persisted in covertly completing the construction of the fence and the unlawful structure.

On March 15^th, 2013, the People’s Committee of Ward A issued Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND to enforce the dismantling of the illegal structure, breaching urban planning guidelines. Enforcement Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND dated March 15^th, 2013, was formally delivered to Mr. T’s household on March 18^th, 2013. However, Mrs. Lê (Mr. T’s wife) reviewed the decision during delivery and refused acceptance.

Despite these actions, Mr. T failed to comply with Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND and subsequently petitioned the People’s Committee of City H for a review of the construction activities at 45/266 P Street, Ward A.

On April 5^th, 2013, the People’s Committee of City H issued Dispatch No. 820/UBND-KNTC affirming the correctness of the actions taken by the People’s Committee of Ward A in documenting violations, issuing suspensions, and enforcing dismantling of Mr. Lê Hữu T’s illegal structure according to regulations. Compliance with dismantling directives was mandated before April 15^th, 2013.

Simultaneously, Dispatch No. 780/UBND-KNTC was issued to Mr. Lê Hữu T by the People’s Committee of City H, instructing the complete dismantling of the illegal structure on land not under their lawful use rights at Plot 77, located at 266/45 P Street, Ward A, before April 15^th, 2013.

On March 5^th, 2014, the People’s Committee of Ward A formally invited Mr. T’s household to attend a meeting at the ward’s People’s Committee to discuss the enforcement schedule, as detailed in Notice No. 29/TB-UBND dated March 5^th, 2014. Mrs. Lê acknowledged receipt of Notice No. 29/TB-UBND on the same day.

Despite these communications, Mr. T’s household did not attend a subsequent meeting on March 10^th, 2014, convened by the People’s Committee of Ward A with residents of Group 2, Ward A, to coordinate enforcement measures against Mr. Lê Hữu T’s unlawful construction.

On March 12^th, 2014, the People’s Committee of Ward A proceeded with the dismantling of Mr. T’s illegal structure. During the enforcement process, the Committee documented the actions taken, inventoried seized assets temporarily, and recorded the transfer of assets with signatures from Mrs. Lê Thị Ngọc L (Mr. T’s wife) and relevant agencies.

Following these events, on March 31^st, 2014, Mr. T initiated an administrative lawsuit seeking annulment of Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND dated March 15^th, 2013, issued by the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A, and requested compensation totaling VND 620,000,000 due to the enforcement actions undertaken.

In the Decision to Dismiss Administrative Case No. 04/2015/QĐST-HC dated May 21^st, 2015, the People’s Court of Huế City, Thừa Thiên Huế Province, ruled to dismiss Administrative Case No. 02/2014/TLST-HC dated May 7^th, 2014. This case involved a complaint against Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND dated March 15^th, 2013, issued by the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A, City H, Thừa Thiên Huế Province.

The court cited that Mr. Lê Hữu T and Mrs. Lê Thị Ngọc L were aware of the administrative decision since March 18^th, 2013, and the lawsuit was filed on March 31^st, 2014, exceeding the statutory time limit of one year and thirteen days for filing an administrative lawsuit under point a, clause 2 of Article 104 of the Law on Administrative Procedures. Therefore, the court dismissed the case and returned the complaint to the plaintiffs under point c, clause 1 of Article 100, and points đ, 1 and 2 of Article 120, Article 121, and Article 122 of the Law on Administrative Procedures.

In the Decision on Appeal Resolution No. 02/2015/QĐPT-HC dated July 23^rd, 2015, the People’s Court of Thừa Thiên Huế Province upheld the dismissal decision of the People’s Court of Huế City in Administrative Case No. 04/2015/QĐST-HC dated May 21^st, 2015.

However, in the Cassation Appeal No. 01/2018/KN-HC dated June 14^th, 2018, the Chief Justice of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng recommended that the Judicial Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng conduct a cassation trial. The objective was to annul the Decision on Appeal Resolution No. 02/2015/QĐPT-HC dated July 23^rd, 2015, of the People’s Court of Thừa Thiên Huế Province and the Decision to Dismiss Administrative Case No. 04/2015/QĐST-HC dated May 21^st, 2015, of the People’s Court of Huế City.

The Chief Justice further proposed that the People’s Court of Huế City accept and adjudicate the complaint filed by Mr. Lê Hữu T and Mrs. Lê Thị Ngọc L, seeking compensation from the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A for damages resulting from unlawful enforcement actions.

During the cassation trial, the representative of the People’s Procuracy of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng recommended that the Judicial Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng accept the Chief Justice’s Cassation Appeal.

COURT’S OPINION:

[1] According to the complaint filed on March 31^st, 2014, Mr. Lê Hữu T and Mrs. Lê Thị Ngọc L raised the following issues:

[2] They contested Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND dated March 15^th, 2013 issued by the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A, City H, regarding the enforcement to dismantle the construction violating urban order regulations at house No. 45/266 P Street, Ward A, City H, where Mr. T and Mrs. L are the owners. They asserted that this administrative decision was unlawful.

[3] They also contested the enforcement actions carried out by the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A, City H, at house No. 45/266 P Street, Ward A, City H, and demanded compensation for damages caused by the enforcement actions, claiming that these actions were unlawful and caused severe consequences.

[4] Upon reviewing the contents of the complaint and the documents and evidence available in the case file, the Court finds:

[5] 1) Regarding the contestation of the administrative decision:

[6] On March 15^th, 2013, the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A, City H, issued the Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND concerning the enforcement to dismantle the construction violating urban order regulations at house No. 45/266 P Street, Ward A, City H, where Mr. T and Mrs. L are the owners. On March 18^th, 2013, officials of the People’s Committee of Ward A delivered this decision to Mr. T and Mrs. L.

The delivery was recorded in a minutes at 11:30 a.m with the presence of representatives from the People’s Committee, the Fatherland Front, the Residential Group, and two witnesses. The delivery minutes clearly indicated the number and date of the decision, the content of the enforcement, and noted that Mrs. L had reviewed the enforcement decision but did not cooperate, did not sign the minutes, and stated that the enforcement was unlawful.

[7] Therefore, there is a legal basis to determine that on March 18^th, 2013, Mr. T and Mrs. L became aware of Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND dated March 15^th, 2013 of the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A.

[8] Based on point a, clause 2, Article 104 of the Administrative Procedure Law of 2010, the one-year period (from the date of awareness of the administrative decision) for Mr. T and Mrs. L to exercise their right to file a lawsuit had expired. As they only filed the lawsuit on March 31^st, 2014, the first-instance and appellate courts correctly determined that the statute of limitations to contest the above Decision No. 02 had expired, which was lawful.

[9] 2) Regarding the contestation of the administrative action:

[10] On March 12^th, 2014, the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A carried out the enforcement action to dismantle the construction violating urban order regulations at house No. 45/266 P Street, Ward A, City H.

[11] On March 31^st, 2014, Mr. T and Mrs. L filed a petition contesting the enforcement action of the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A and demanded compensation of VND 620,000,000 for damages caused by the enforcement action.

[12] Based on point a, clause 2, Article 104 of the Administrative Procedure Law of 2010, the petition of Mr. T and Mrs. L was within the statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit and should be resolved in accordance with the law.

[13] Upon consideration:

[14] The first-instance and appellate courts correctly determined that the statute of limitations to contest the administrative decision had expired, but they failed to resolve the contestation against the administrative action of the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A (by suspending the administrative case regarding the lawsuit against Decision No. 02/QĐ-UBND dated March 15^th, 2013 of the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A and returning the complaint to the plaintiffs), which was not lawful. This handling was neither comprehensive nor thorough with respect to the plaintiffs’ lawsuit, thus severely violating administrative procedure law.

Therefore, the Court accepts the appeal of the Chief Justice of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng, vacates the Decision No. 02/2015/QĐPT-HC dated July 23^rd, 2015 of the People’s Court of Thừa Thiên Huế Province and the Decision No. 04/2015/QĐST-HC dated May 21^st, 2015 of the People’s Court of Huế City, Thừa Thiên Huế Province, to conduct a first-instance trial again regarding the lawsuit of Mr. T and Mrs. L against the enforcement action of the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A, City H, Thừa Thiên Huế Province, and the claim for compensation for damages caused by the enforcement action to ensure the lawful rights and interests of the litigants.

[15] Because an enforcement action is directly tied to the underlying enforcement decision, they are inextricably linked. Therefore, when resolving a lawsuit challenging the enforcement action, the trial panel possesses the authority to comprehensively examine the legality of the enforcement decision and any other pertinent administrative decisions. This expansive review is not limited by the statute of limitations for filing lawsuits against these decisions. This unrestricted examination is crucial to ensure a complete, thorough, and legally sound resolution of the entire case.

In light of the foregoing,

IT IS DECIDED:

Pursuant to clause 3, Article 272; Article 277 and Article 278 of the Administrative Procedure Law of 2015:

1. To accept the Cassation Appeal No. 01/2018/KN-HC dated June 14^th, 2018of the Chief Justice of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng.
2. To vacate the Decision No. 02/2015/QĐPT-HC dated July 23^rd, 2015of the People’s Court of Thừa Thiên Huế Province and the Decision No. 04/2015/QĐST-HC dated May 21^st, 2015 of the People’s Court of Huế City. Remand the case file to the People’s Court of Huế City for a new first-instance trial regarding the lawsuit of Mr. Lê Hữu T and Mrs. Lê Thị Ngọc L against the enforcement action at house No. 45/266 P Street, Ward A, City H by the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Ward A, City H, and the claim for compensation for damages caused by the enforcement action according to the law.
3. The cassation decision is legally effective from the date the Cassation Trial Panel issues the decision.

CONTENT OF THE CASE LAW:

“[15] Because an enforcement action is directly tied to the underlying enforcement decision, they are inextricably linked. Therefore, when resolving a lawsuit challenging the enforcement action, the trial panel possesses the authority to comprehensively examine the legality of the enforcement decision and any other pertinent administrative decisions. This expansive review is not limited by the statute of limitations for filing lawsuits against these decisions. This unrestricted examination is crucial to ensure a complete, thorough, and legally sound resolution of the entire case.”

If you need more consulting, please Contact Us at TNHH NT International Law Firm (ntpartnerlawfirm.com)

You can also download the .docx version here.