CASE LAW DRAFT NO. 11/2024 On the basis for appeal under the reconsideration procedure (Please note that this image is not related to the specific case being discussed).

CASE LAW DRAFT NO. 11/2024

On the basis for appeal under the reconsideration procedure

Approved by the Judges’ Council of the Supreme People’s Court on [date] [month] 2024 and published under Decision No. [number]/QĐ-CA on [date] [month] 2024 by the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court.

Source of the Case Law:

The Decision No. 11/2023/DS-GĐT dated July 17^th, 2023, of the Judges’ Council of the Supreme People’s Court regarding the case of “Property On Land Dispute” between the plaintiff, Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L, and the defendants, Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H.

Location of the Case Law’s Content:

Paragraphs 1, 2 and 4 of the “Court’s Opinion” section.

Summary of the Case Law:

– Factual Background:

In a case concerning a dispute over property on land, the plaintiff was temporarily granted land use rights and authorized to contact the competent People’s Committee to initiate procedures for transferring land use rights and obtaining a Land Use Rights Certificate in accordance with the law. Subsequently, the individual granted temporary land use rights received a Land Use Rights Certificate from the competent People’s Committee. However, this Land Use Rights Certificate was later revoked by decision of the competent People’s Committee.

– Legal Resolution:

In this instance, the court is tasked with determining that the revocation of the Land Use Rights Certificate falls within the jurisdiction of the People’s Committee and therefore does not provide a basis for appeal under the reconsideration procedure.

Relevant Legal Provisions:

– Clause 3, Article 100, and Article 105 of the Land Law 2013;

– Articles 351 and 352 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015.

Keywords:

“Temporary allocation of land use rights by the court”; “Revocation of the Land Use Rights Certificate”; “Not a basis for protest under the reconsideration procedure”.

CASE DETAILS

In the complaint filed on October 25^th, 2012, and throughout the proceedings, the plaintiff, Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L, asserted the following:

The land where she cultivated coffee in Village B, Ward Y, City K, Gia Lai Province, had been partly transferred from Mr. K and partly jointly transferred from Mr. Phạm Thanh G in 1996. The transfer from Mr. G lacked formal documentation; subsequent to the transfer, Mrs. L dug holes and planted coffee trees on this land.

In 2012, Mr. G and his wife entered the land without permission, cared for, and harvested the coffee trees planted by Mrs. L.

They also planted new coffee trees on the transferred land. Consequently, Mrs. L filed suit seeking an order for Mr. G and his wife to return 5,189.45 m² of land (based on an on-site inspection and measurement dated April 25^th, 2013) and 434 Robusta coffee trees she planted in 1996. However, on July 18^th, 2013, she withdrew her request regarding the land use rights but maintained her claim for the return of the 434 coffee trees.

The defendants, Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H, presented the following defense:

They acknowledged leasing the 5,189.45 m² of land to Mrs. L and Mr. T for coffee cultivation from 1996 to 2011, albeit without formal documentation. In early 2012, following the expiration of the lease period, they repossessed the coffee plantation, including trees planted by Mr. T and Mrs. L, and claimed to have incurred care costs totaling VND 62,700,000. Nevertheless, Mrs. L harvested coffee from the land on October 30^th, 2012.

According to their agreement with Mr. T: From 1996 to 2001, no rent or expenses were charged; from 2001 to 2006, Mr. T paid them VND 2,400,000 (received in full); from 2006 to 2011, Mr. T was obligated to pay VND 2,300,000 annually, which remained unpaid by 2012.

Consequently, they counterclaimed, requesting the court to compel Mrs. L to pay them: care and fertilizer costs totaling VND 62,700,000; land rent for six years (2006 to 2012) amounting to VND 13,800,000, plus interest totaling VND 26,520,405, aggregating to VND 89,220,405.

In the First-instance Civil Judgment No. 79/2013/DS-ST dated September 27^th, 2013, the People’s Court of Pleiku City, Gia Lai Province rendered the following decisions:

The court accepted Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L’s lawsuit, ordering Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H to return 434 Robusta coffee trees.

The court rejected all counterclaims by Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H, which sought VND 89,220,405 from Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L for contractual, investment, and care costs related to the coffee plantation.

Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H were compelled to return 434 Robusta coffee trees planted in 1996 on Plot No. 36b and part of Plot No. 36c, Map Sheet No. 14, with an area of 5,189.45 m² in village B, ward Y, City P, Gia Lai Province.

Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L was ordered to pay Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H an amount of VND 4,088,000, equivalent to 73 Robusta coffee trees harvested in 2012.

Temporary rights to use Plot No. 36b and part of Plot No. 36c, Map Sheet No. 14, with a total area of 5,189.45 m² in village B, ward Y, City K, Gia Lai Province, were granted to Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L under the following conditions:

– Plot 36b: Area of 704.45 m², with boundaries as follows: East adjacent to a dirt road, 36.5 m; West adjacent to Mr. M’s land, 36.5 m; South adjacent to a dirt road, 19.4 m; North adjacent to Mr. G’s land, 19.2 m.

– Part of Plot 36c: Area of 4,485 m², with boundaries as follows: East adjacent to land by the lake road, 28.5 m; West adjacent to a dirt road, 36.5 m; South adjacent to a dirt road, 139 m; North adjacent to Mr. R’s land, 137 m.

Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L was granted the right to contact the competent People’s Committee to proceed with the necessary procedures for transferring the right to use the aforementioned land Plots and obtaining a Land Use Rights Certificate in accordance with current legal regulations.

On September 30^th, 2013, Mr. G and Mrs. H filed an appeal against this judgment.

In the Appeal Decision No. 09/QĐ/KNPT-DS dated October 10^th, 2013, the Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Pleiku City appealed against the aforementioned First-instance Civil Judgment.

In the Appellate Civil Judgment No. 18/2014/DS-PT dated April 3^rd, 2014, the People’s Court of Gia Lai Province made the following rulings:

1. The court rejected the appeal filed by the defendants, Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H.
2. The court partially accepted the appeal of the People’s Procuracy of Pleiku City, Gia Lai Province, as outlined in Appeal Decision No. 09/QĐ/KNPT-DS dated October 10^th, 2013, and amended the First-instance Civil Judgment No. 79/2013/DS-ST dated September 27^th, 2013, of the People’s Court of Pleiku City, Gia Lai Province with the following revisions:

– Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L’s lawsuit was upheld.

– Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H were ordered to return 434 Robusta coffee trees planted in 1996 on Plot No. 36B and part of Plot No. 36C, Map Sheet No. 14, with an area of 5,189.45 m² in village B, ward Y, City K, Gia Lai Province.

– Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L was instructed to pay Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H VND 4,088,000, representing the value of 73 Robusta coffee trees planted by them in 2012. Additionally, she was granted ownership of 15 Robusta coffee trees on Plot 36B and 58 Robusta coffee trees on Plot 36C, Map Sheet No. 14, in village B, ward Y, City K, planted by Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H in 2012, totaling 507 Robusta coffee trees.

– Temporary rights to use Plot No. 36B and part of Plot No. 36C, Map Sheet No. 14, with a total area of 5,189.45 m² in village B, ward Y, City K, Gia Lai Province, were assigned to Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L. The competent People’s Committee was instructed to proceed with the transfer of land use rights and issue a Land Use Rights Certificate in accordance with the Land Law.

– Plot 36B: Area of 704.45 m², with boundaries as follows: East adjacent to a dirt road, 36.5 m; West adjacent to Mr. M’s land, 36.5 m; South adjacent to a dirt road, 19.4 m; North adjacent to Mr. G’s land, 19.2 m.

– Part of Plot 36C: Area of 4,485 m², with boundaries as follows: East adjacent to land by the lake road, 28.5 m; West adjacent to a dirt road, 36.5 m; South adjacent to a dirt road, 139 m; North adjacent to Mr. R’s land, 137 m.

Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L was granted the right to contact the competent People’s Committee to facilitate the procedures for transferring the aforementioned land plots and obtaining a Land Use Rights Certificate in accordance with the provisions of the Land Law.

3. The court rejected the counterclaim made by Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H, seeking VND 89,220,405 from Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L for contractual, investment, and care costs related to the coffee plantation.

In the Reconsideration Decision No. 03/2022/DS-TT dated January 11^th, 2022, the Judges’ Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng made the following determinations:

The entire Appellate Civil Judgment No. 18/2014/DS-PT dated April 3^rd, 2014, of the People’s Court of Gia Lai Province, and the First-instance Civil Judgment No. 79/2013/DS-ST dated September 27^th, 2013, of the People’s Court of Pleiku City, Gia Lai Province, in the case “Property On Land Dispute” between the plaintiff, Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L, and the defendants, Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H, were vacated.

The case file was remanded to the People’s Court of Pleiku City, Gia Lai Province, for a new first-instance trial in accordance with legal provisions.

On February 25^th, 2022, Mrs. L submitted a request for a review under the reconsideration procedure of the Reconsideration Decision by the Judges’ Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng.

On March 17^th, 2022, the People’s Court of Gia Lai Province issued Document No. 101/TA-DS requesting the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court to appeal under the cassation procedure against the Reconsideration Decision of the Judges’ Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng.

In the Cassation Appeal Decision No. 09/2023/KN-DS dated February 24^th, 2023, the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court appealed against the Reconsideration Decision No. 03/2022/DS-TT dated January 11^th, 2022, of the Judges’ Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng regarding the case “Property On Land Dispute” between Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L, as the plaintiff, and Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Mrs. Đặng Thị H, as the defendants.

The Chief Justice requested the Judges’ Council of the Supreme People’s Court to conduct a cassation trial, vacate the Reconsideration Decision No. 03/2022/DS-TT dated January 11^th, 2022, and uphold the Appellate Civil Judgment No. 18/2014/DS-PT dated April 3^rd, 2014, of the People’s Court of Gia Lai Province.

During the cassation hearing, the representative of the Supreme People’s Procuracy recommended that the Judges’ Council of the Supreme People’s Court accept the Cassation Appeal Decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court.

COURT’S OPINION:

[1] Following the implementation of the Appellate Civil Judgment, on December 8^th, 2015, Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L received a Land Use Rights Certificate covering the disputed area of 5,189.45 m². Reports No. 122/BC-TTr dated August 30^th, 2016, and No. 140/BC-XKT dated October 12^th, 2016, from the Inspectorate of Gia Lai Province concluded that Mrs. L was ineligible for the certificate.

Document No. 835-UBND-TTr dated June 26^th, 2013, from the People’s Committee of Pleiku City, Gia Lai Province, was deemed inaccurate in reflecting the true nature and status of the land use. On October 25^th, 2016, Document No. 4926/UBND-NC of the People’s Committee of Gia Lai Province concurred with the inspection findings and proposed a resolution method as outlined in the reports from the Inspectorate.

Subsequently, on November 15^th, 2016, the People’s Committee of Pleiku City issued Decision No. 1935/QĐ-UBND and Decision No. 1936/QĐ-UBND to revoke the Land Use Rights Certificates issued to Mrs. L, encompassing the disputed land area.

[2] During the initial trial phase, Ms. L withdrew her request to resolve the dispute over land use rights. Both the first-instance and appellate court judgments temporarily granting land use rights to Ms. L were in compliance with legal provisions. The allocation and issuance of land use rights certificates to users fall within the purview of the People’s Committee and must adhere to the Land Law’s stipulations.

Therefore, the reports from the Inspectorate of Gia Lai Province and the decisions by the Pleiku City People’s Committee to revoke Mrs. L’s land use rights certificates do not fundamentally alter the essence of the judgments. Consequently, they do not constitute new circumstances meriting reconsideration under the provisions of Articles 351 and 352 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code.

[3] Concerning the dispute over the crops on the land, both the first-instance and appellate courts resolved this issue on substantiated grounds. Should the parties continue to contest land use rights, they may initiate a separate lawsuit to address the matter in a different case. Alternatively, if they disagree with the issuance, revocation, or annulment of land use rights certificates by the People’s Committee, they may file an administrative lawsuit to resolve the issue.

[4] The Judges’ Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng erroneously considered the reports from the Inspectorate of Gia Lai Province and the decisions of the Pleiku City People’s Committee to revoke the land use rights certificates as grounds for reconsideration.

Consequently, the decision to vacate Appellate Civil Judgment No. 18/2014/DS-PT dated April 3^rd, 2014, of the Gia Lai Provincial People’s Court and First-instance Civil Judgment No. 79/2013/DS-ST dated September 27^th, 2013, of the Pleiku City People’s Court, Gia Lai Province, for a new first-instance trial was found to lack merit.

In light of the foregoing,

IT IS DECIDED:

Pursuant to point a, clause 2, Article 337, clause 2, Article 343, and Article 344 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code:

1. The Cassation Appeal Decision No. 09/2023/KN-DS dated February 24^th, 2023, of the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court is to be accepted.
2. The Reconsideration Decision No. 03/2022/DS-TT dated January 11^th, 2022, of the Judges’ Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng, regarding the case “Dispute over assets on land” between the plaintiff, Ms. Trần Thị Hồng L, and the defendants, Mr. Phạm Thanh G and Ms. Đặng Thị H, is to be vacated.

The Appellate Civil Judgment No. 18/2014/DS-PT dated April 3^rd, 2014, of the Gia Lai Provincial People’s Court shall be maintained.

CONTENT OF THE CASE LAW:

“[1] Following the implementation of the Appellate Civil Judgment, on December 8^th, 2015, Mrs. Trần Thị Hồng L received a Land Use Rights Certificate covering the disputed area of 5,189.45 m². Reports No. 122/BC-TTr dated August 30^th, 2016, and No. 140/BC-XKT dated October 12^th, 2016, from the Inspectorate of Gia Lai Province concluded that Mrs. L was ineligible for the certificate.

Document No. 835-UBND-TTr dated June 26^th, 2013, from the People’s Committee of Pleiku City, Gia Lai Province, was deemed inaccurate in reflecting the true nature and status of the land use. On October 25^th, 2016, Document No. 4926/UBND-NC of the People’s Committee of Gia Lai Province concurred with the inspection findings and proposed a resolution method as outlined in the reports from the Inspectorate.

Subsequently, on November 15^th, 2016, the People’s Committee of Pleiku City issued Decision No. 1935/QĐ-UBND and Decision No. 1936/QĐ-UBND to revoke the Land Use Rights Certificates issued to Mrs. L, encompassing the disputed land area.

[2] During the initial trial phase, Ms. L withdrew her request to resolve the dispute over land use rights. Both the first-instance and appellate court judgments temporarily granting land use rights to Ms. L were in compliance with legal provisions. The allocation and issuance of land use rights certificates to users fall within the purview of the People’s Committee and must adhere to the Land Law’s stipulations.

Therefore, the reports from the Inspectorate of Gia Lai Province and the decisions by the Pleiku City People’s Committee to revoke Mrs. L’s land use rights certificates do not fundamentally alter the essence of the judgments. Consequently, they do not constitute new circumstances meriting reconsideration under the provisions of Articles 351 and 352 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code.

…

[4] The Judges’ Committee of the High People’s Court in Đà Nẵng erroneously considered the reports from the Inspectorate of Gia Lai Province and the decisions of the Pleiku City People’s Committee to revoke the land use rights certificates as grounds for reconsideration.

Consequently, the decision to vacate Appellate Civil Judgment No. 18/2014/DS-PT dated April 3^rd, 2014, of the Gia Lai Provincial People’s Court and First-instance Civil Judgment No. 79/2013/DS-ST dated September 27^th, 2013, of the Pleiku City People’s Court, Gia Lai Province, for a new first-instance trial was found to lack merit.”

THE RATIONALE FOR THE CASE LAW DRAFT’S PROPOSAL

A civil court case involved a property on land dispute. The court temporarily awarded land use rights to one party, who then rightfully contacted the relevant People’s Committee to obtain a land use rights certificate. The certificate was issued, but later revoked by the People’s Committee.

Some courts believe this revocation by the People’s Committee constitutes new circumstances requiring a reevaluation of the civil case. However, this view is flawed. Article 105 of the 2013 Land Law designates the People’s Committee as the authority issuing land use rights certificates. Individuals or entities disagreeing with a revocation can pursue an administrative lawsuit.

The Supreme People’s Court’s Judges’ Council reached a clear conclusion in this Cassation Decision: “Allocating land and issuing land use rights certificates fall under the People’s Committee’s authority and must comply with the Land Law.

Therefore, reports from the Gia Lai Province Inspectorate and the Pleiku City People’s Committee’s decisions revoking Ms. L’s certificates do not fundamentally change the judgments’ substance and don’t constitute new circumstances for reconsideration under Articles 351 and 352 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code.”

To ensure consistent legal application in similar cases, developing case law on this issue is necessary.

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

You can also download the .docx version here.