The judge's statement
In this case, the focus of the dispute between the two sides is whether the service center should receive compensation for demolition. The service center took the house involved as its residence and obtained a business license. In case of demolition in operation, the compensation for demolition received by Lao Zhang includes relocation subsidy and comprehensive subsidy for suspension of production and business. Relocation subsidy and comprehensive subsidy for suspension of production and business are the actual losses suffered by the service center due to demolition. Lao Zhang received this part of the compensation for demolition and should return it to the plaintiff.
In many cases, when the lessor signs a store lease contract with the lessee, it will be stipulated in the contract that "the lease contract between the two parties will automatically terminate" and "the lessee will cooperate with the lessor to vacate the house" to prevent demolition. Therefore, once the leased store is included in the scope of demolition, the lessor will often sue the court to terminate the contract and recover the store; The lessee thinks that he enjoys the benefits of store demolition and does not agree to terminate the store lease contract without sufficient compensation.
According to the Regulations on the Administration of Urban House Demolition, the lessee is entitled to compensation for related losses. When a demolition unit signs a demolition compensation agreement with the lessor, the lessee's compensation is often included. If there is a lease relationship, the lessee is entitled to compensation; However, before the demolition compensation agreement is signed with the demolition unit, the lessor has terminated the contract with the lessee and recovered the store, except for the relevant interests of the lessee. Therefore, both parties should handle the termination of the contract carefully to prevent new disputes.