Perspective | Legal Research on Whether Owners' Committees Have the Qualification as Litigation Subjects
Published:
2024-11-05
In recent years, as the involvement of owners' committees in social life has deepened, the number of lawsuits involving owners' committees has also increased. However, current laws and regulations do not clearly define the litigation status of owners' committees, leading to a rather awkward situation in judicial practice where owners' committees often find themselves in a difficult position in litigation cases. Some courts allow owners' committees to participate in lawsuits, while others believe that the litigation status of owners' committees is unclear and is limited to areas explicitly defined by law. In light of this, this article attempts to explore the issue of the litigation qualification of owners' committees through an analysis of relevant provisions in current laws and regulations concerning owners' committees and the potential issues encountered in judicial practice.
Introduction
In recent years, as the involvement of owners' committees in social life has deepened, the number of lawsuits involving owners' committees has also increased. However, current laws and regulations do not clearly define the litigation status of owners' committees, leading to a very awkward situation for owners' committees in judicial practice. Some courts allow owners' committees to participate in lawsuits, while others believe that the litigation status of owners' committees is unclear and is limited to areas explicitly defined by law. In light of this, this article attempts to explore the issue of the litigation qualification of owners' committees through an analysis of relevant provisions in current laws and regulations concerning owners' committees and potential issues encountered in judicial practice.
First, the owners' committee does not possess the necessary qualifications for litigation as stipulated by current laws.
1. The owners' committee does not meet the qualifications of a plaintiff.
Article 122 of the Civil Procedure Law states: "The plaintiff is a citizen, legal person, or other organization that has a direct interest in the case." According to the legal definition of the responsibilities of the owners' committee, the owners' committee is the executive body of the owners' meeting, implementing the resolutions of the owners' meeting. Article 278 of the Civil Code limits the matters decided by the owners' meeting to: (1) formulating and amending the rules of procedure for the owners' meeting; (2) formulating and amending management regulations; (3) electing or replacing members of the owners' committee; (4) hiring and dismissing property service enterprises or other managers; (5) using maintenance funds for buildings and their ancillary facilities; (6) raising maintenance funds for buildings and their ancillary facilities; (7) reconstructing or rebuilding buildings and their ancillary facilities; (8) changing the use of common areas or engaging in business activities in common areas; (9) other significant matters related to common ownership and joint management rights. In other words, the owners' committee only has the right to litigate when performing matters related to the above nine items, and this right must be authorized by the owners' meeting. It does not enjoy all the litigation rights of "other organizations" as stipulated by law. As for the opinion in the Supreme People's Court's response on August 20, 2003, regarding whether the owners' committee of Jinhu New Village has the qualification for civil litigation, it only confirms that the owners' committee meets the conditions of "other organizations" and limits its civil litigation rights: that is, the owners' committee can only file a lawsuit in its own name when the real estate development unit has not transferred the planning documents of the residential area and other materials to the owners' committee, or has not provided supporting public facilities, special fees for public facilities, maintenance fees for public areas, and property management rooms, commercial spaces, etc. Therefore, it can be seen from this response that the Supreme People's Court only stipulates that the owners' committee has the litigation qualification of "other organizations" in these few types of lawsuits, and cannot broadly extend the scope of the owners' committee's litigation qualification.
2. The owners' committee does not have its own property and cannot independently bear civil liability.
According to the responsibilities of the owners' committee, the ownership of the property it manages belongs to all owners, not to the owners' committee itself. Since it does not have independent property, the owners' committee lacks the financial basis to bear civil liability in property-related lawsuits.
Second, the voting methods for matters jointly decided by the owners as stipulated by law determine that the owners' committee, as the executive body of the owners' meeting, can only engage in general non-property civil legal acts.
Article 278, paragraph 1 of the Civil Code states: "The following matters shall be jointly decided by the owners: ... (7) reconstruction or rebuilding of buildings and their ancillary facilities..." Paragraph 2 states: "The owners voting on the above matters must obtain the consent of more than three-quarters of the owners participating in the voting based on the area of their exclusive parts and more than three-quarters of the owners participating in the voting." However, in practice, if the owners' committee incurs significant property losses while specifically implementing the resolution of the owners' meeting regarding the reconstruction or rebuilding of buildings, the civil liability arising from this, although according to Article 280 of the Civil Code, "the decisions of the owners' meeting or the owners' committee are legally binding on the owners," can hardly be enforced against all owners in judicial practice. Even if all owners are ordered to bear civil liability, it is often difficult to execute such judgments. This is something that the legislators did not consider when drafting the Civil Code. Additionally, if the owners' committee signs contracts in its own name while performing this civil legal act, in the event of civil disputes arising from that contract, should the counterparty assert rights against the owners' committee or against the owners' meeting? For example, the board of directors is the executive body of the shareholders' meeting, and the civil liabilities arising from its performance of duties are borne by the corporate entity, not by the shareholders' meeting or the board of directors. In other words, the civil liabilities arising from the performance of duties by the owners' committee can only be borne by the owners, not by the owners' committee or the owners' meeting. Therefore, from this perspective, the owners' committee can only engage in general non-property civil legal acts related to property service management.
Third, the owners' committee is not a "other organization" in the general sense as defined by law.
In judicial practice, "other organizations" are generally defined as non-legal entities. However, unlike common "other organizations" such as sole proprietorships or partnerships, the owners' committee does not have its own property; the ownership of the property it manages belongs to the owners, and it only exercises management rights. According to legal provisions, in civil litigation, if a non-legal entity's property is insufficient to pay off debts, its contributors or founders must bear unlimited liability. The owners' committee is the executive body of the owners' meeting, meaning it performs the responsibilities of the owners' meeting. In judicial practice, the effectiveness of the owners' meeting's voting on property matters is difficult to extend to all owners. Therefore, when property-related lawsuits arise from the owners' committee's implementation of the owners' meeting's resolutions and civil liabilities must be borne, it is often impossible to order the founders (owners) of the owners' meeting to bear unlimited liability in trials or executions.
Fourth, the Civil Code and related laws and regulations impose restrictions on the litigation rights of the owners' committee.
1. From the Supreme People's Court's judicial interpretation regarding property service disputes, the 2009 interpretation on several issues regarding the application of laws in property service dispute cases grants the owners' committee several litigation rights: Article 2 states that property service enterprises have one of the following situations: (1) the property service enterprise entrusts all property service business within the property service area to others and signs an entrustment contract; (2) if the property service contract contains clauses that exempt the property service enterprise from liability, increase the responsibility of the owners' committee or owners, or exclude the main rights of the owners' committee or owners, the owners' committee may request confirmation of the invalidity of the contract or related clauses; Article 8 states that the owners' committee may request the termination of the property service contract; Article 10 states that after the rights and obligations of the property service contract are terminated, the owners' committee may request the property service enterprise to exit the property service area, transfer property service rooms and related facilities, and provide necessary materials and special maintenance funds it manages. In this judicial interpretation, the litigation rights of the owners' committee are strictly limited and do not grant all the litigation rights of "other organizations" as stipulated by law.
Article 280, paragraph 2 of the Civil Code states: "If the decisions made by the owners' meeting or the owners' committee infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of the owners, the affected owners may request the people's court to revoke them." This provision actually limits the right to sue of the owners' meeting or the owners' committee to disputes with the owners. This provision does not contradict the Supreme People's Court's reply on August 15, 2005, regarding whether the owners' committee of Chunyu Garden has the qualification to be a party in civil litigation, which states that "the owners' committee can participate in litigation as a defendant in civil disputes with others." After the implementation of the Civil Code, the interpretation on December 23, 2020, regarding the application of law in property service dispute cases, deleted the relevant provisions in the 2009 judicial interpretation that granted the owners' committee the aforementioned right to sue.
Conclusion
Current laws and regulations strictly limit the litigation rights of the owners' committee, which does not enjoy all the litigation rights granted to general "other organizations"; its right to sue is limited to matters related to property service management. Therefore, the owners' committee should not be equated with general "other organizations," and the legitimacy of the litigation rights it claims should be strictly examined in judicial practice.
Key words:
Related News
Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Region
Address: Floor 55-57, Jinan China Resources Center, 11111 Jingshi Road, Lixia District, Jinan City, Shandong Province
