On The Ownership Of The Resettlement Houses

The lack of relevant legislation and the differences between local policies in different places make it represent a high difference between the compensation for expropriation of collective land especially in the compensation object, content and scope in our country. This leads to an phenomena that the same cases in different places with different judicial results happen frequently in judicial practice. The relevant rights of the housing in collective land includes the right of the use of cartilage and the ownership of the house land, which are two different types of rights. The right of the use of cartilage is owned by all the family members while the ownership of the house land is owned by those members who devote to the construction of the house. Since both of the rights can be the objects and targets of the expropriation of the house over collective land, the compensation should also contain that for the two rights. Thus, the setting house should be shared by people who use the land and own the house over the land.The first part of the thesis discusses the characters, basic contents, and the relationship between the two rights--the right of the use of cartilage and the ownership of the house land. It holds the idea that the right of the use of cartilage should be owned by all the family members while the ownership of the house land should be owned by the members especially devoting to the construction of the house.The second part of the thesis tries to analyze two modes, contents and ways of compensation of expropriation of the housing over collective land according to some relevant laws like "PRC Law on Land Management" combining with "Regulations on the Expropriation of Houses on State-owned Land and Compensation Therefor". As is concerned, the house over collective land should be regarded as independent targets of expropriation. The expropriation is supposed to include the right of the usage of cartilage and the ownership of collective land, so do the compensation.The third part of the essay points out that the ownership of the setting house should be owned by people who use the land and own the house over the land, according to the objects and contents of compensation of the expropriation together with some other factors affecting the ownership of setting house.The forth part of the essay explores the effectiveness of the collective land on the sale and purchase contract, points out that the sale and purchase contract on collective land should not be void by buying; After the contract comes into force, the buyer shall enjoy the house ownership and possession of the land attached. Therefore, after the sale by the government to impose on collective land, and to impose as compensation, housing ownership housing shall vest in the buyer.