1. Legal Basis
(a) Civil Procedure Code 2015
- Clause 4, Article 34 provides:
“In civil cases, if there is a request to annul an unlawful individual administrative decision of a competent authority, organization, or person in state administrative management, the Court shall have jurisdiction to resolve the matter in accordance with the Law on Administrative Procedure.”
– Thus, when a request arises to annul a LURC (a type of individual administrative decision), jurisdiction falls within the scope of the Law on Administrative Procedure 2015.
(b) Law on Administrative Procedure 2015
- Clause 1, Article 31:
“District-level People’s Courts shall, under first-instance procedures, resolve complaints against administrative decisions or administrative acts of commune-level People’s Committees and of competent persons in such agencies within the same locality.” - Clause 4, Article 32:
“Provincial-level People’s Courts shall, under first-instance procedures, resolve complaints against administrative decisions or administrative acts of district-level People’s Committees and their Chairpersons within the same locality.”
– Since LURCs are issued by district-level or provincial-level People’s Committees, jurisdiction over requests to annul a LURC belongs to the Provincial People’s Court.
(c) Guidance of the Supreme People’s Court
- Point 7, Section IV, Official Letter No. 02/TANDTC-PC dated August 2, 2021:
- If the case only concerns a civil dispute over land or inheritance related to land without a request to annul the LURC → jurisdiction lies with the District People’s Court.
- If there is a request to annul the LURC, or if the Court finds it necessary to annul the LURC for a lawful resolution → jurisdiction lies with the Provincial People’s Court.
2. Conclusion
From the above provisions, the following principle can be drawn:
- No request to annul the LURC: jurisdiction lies with the District People’s Court.
- Request to annul the LURC, or the Court must annul to ensure lawful adjudication: jurisdiction lies with the Provincial People’s Court.
3. Commentary
Reasonableness of the rule:
- LURCs are individual administrative decisions issued by district or provincial People’s Committees.
- Annulment of a LURC entails review of the legality of an administrative decision with broad implications.
- Provincial People’s Courts have the authority, staffing, and expertise to resolve such complex matters that involve both civil and administrative elements.
Practical issues:
- Overload at Provincial Courts: Many land disputes involve requests to annul LURCs, pushing large caseloads to the provincial level and causing delays.
- Confusion about jurisdiction: Litigants often file at the District Court, but when annulment of a LURC is requested, the case must be transferred or returned, wasting time and resources.
- Requests arising during trial: Even if annulment was not requested initially, if the Trial Panel finds it necessary to annul the LURC, the case must be transferred to the Provincial Court, complicating procedure.
Recommendations:
- Introduce more flexible mechanisms, allowing District Courts to continue adjudicating where annulment of a LURC is merely incidental, ensuring efficiency and avoiding unnecessary procedural delays.
- Enhance transparency and public guidance on jurisdiction determination before filing lawsuits to minimize case returns, jurisdictional transfers, and to expedite case resolution.
📞 CONTACT LEGAL CONSULTANT:
TLA Law is a leading law firm with a team of highly experienced lawyers specializing in criminal, civil, corporate, marriage and family law, and more. We are committed to providing comprehensive legal support and answering all your legal questions. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
1. Lawyer Vu Thi Phuong Thanh, Ha Noi Bar Association
Email: vtpthanh@tlalaw.vn
2. Lawyer Tran My Le, Ha Noi Bar Association
Email: tmle@tlalaw.vn
Khuong Ngoc Lan