Legal Doctrine and Judicial Review of Eminent Domain in China

Author:

Mao Wenzheng,Qiao Shitong

Abstract

Which of the three legal doctrines of public use, just compensation, and due process is the most effective in constraining abuses of eminent domain power? This article addresses this question for the first time and presents the first-ever systematic investigation of the judicial review of eminent domain in China. Our empirical study reveals that Chinese courts focus on eminent domain procedures while rarely supporting claims based on public interest or just compensation. Procedural rules are determinate and therefore easier to enforce than substantial standards of public interest and just compensation. Chinese courts also choose to focus on eminent domain procedures to confine their own judicial review power for the purpose of self-preservation in an authoritarian state that empowers the courts to monitor and control local governments but does not want them to become too powerful. The study calls for a “due process revolution” in eminent domain law and introduces the “judicial politics of legal doctrine” approach to the study of Chinese law, an approach that takes both political institutions and legal doctrines seriously.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Law,General Social Sciences

Reference72 articles.

1. Innovation Through Intimidation: An Empirical Account of Defamation Litigation in China.;Liebman;Harvard International Law Journal,2006

2. SPC (Supreme People’s Court). 最高人民法院关于人民法院在互联网公布裁判文书的规定 [Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Issuance of Judgments on the Internet by the People’s Courts], November 13, 2013.

3. Daily Online, People’s . “张渝文: 中国民告官案原告胜诉率从 10 年前 30% 降至 10% 以下” [“Zhang Yuwen: Plaintiff’s Success Rate in Chinese Civil Complaint Cases Dropped from 30% Ten Years Ago to Less than 10%”]. 2014. http://politics.people.com.cn/n/2014/1105/c1001-25976290.html.

4. “大数据分析:中国司法裁判文书上网公开报告” [“Big Data Analysis: Report on Publicizing Chinese Judicial Decisions on Internet”]. ⟨⟨中国法律评论⟩⟩ China;Ma;Law Review,2016

5. Suing the Leviathan-An Empirical Analysis of the Changing Rate of Administrative Litigation in China

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3