Near the ultramodern skyscrapers made of aluminum and glass were small private buildings, which strongly damaged the architectural appearance. In the USSR, everything was architecturally clear and understandable: no self-will in construction, no objections from the population and individual citizens if something was required to be torn down.
For example, a private house interfered with the construction of a multi-storey building. Private owners were invited to the office to the official, and the issue of demolition was quickly resolved in a voluntary-mandatory manner. A private trader was offered an apartment in a new house or was paid not so hot as monetary compensation.
In the West, everything has been and remains to this day completely different. And examples of this mass. And not only in the USA.
In communist China, supposedly (which was never fully communist), the legal “base” is almost completely identical to the American one. And in the USA private property of any kind is sacred. In fact, the whole capitalist society is created on the right of private property. The “ideals of a brighter future,” promoted by the Chinese Communists, also fully rely on the right to private property. Such is the paradox. In the legal system, this turns out to be striking incidents for us, very interesting in terms of their solution.
In one of the provinces of the Middle Kingdom not so long ago began the construction of high-speed wide-range highway. The builders soon faced a legal, puzzling problem - the route rested on private housing. As it happened, the designers of the main line did not take into account the peculiarities of private real estate in China - no one knows. But the fact is a fact - did not take into account.
Attempts to negotiate with the owner of the house and its tenants about the demolition and financial compensation did not lead to anything. It is impossible to turn off the highway and bypass the house in this way, since any deviation on the highway with high speeds is fraught with safety violations for drivers. How to be?
The stubbornness of the householder and the tenants continued. They believed that the construction of the highway would be further banned and designers will, willy-nilly, have to re-design the route, but without the “run over” to the house. But it was not there: the builders were given the command not to deviate! As a result, the house was in the middle of the roadway.
The round-the-clock noise of the highway under construction, the high concentration in the air of burning and the smell of gasoline forced the owner of the house and its residents to move out. However, it is still impossible to demolish the house - there is no legal agreement between the construction company and the owner of the property. And without an agreement, the demolition will be recognized in court as unlawful and, moreover, a large fine will be imposed on the company with the simultaneous demand to restore everything as it was.
This is the case with private property in supposedly communist China.