An agreement was reached with the plaintiff, there is no economic dispute, and the house is still se

The original defendant went to the court to find the judge concerned, and the two parties issued a settlement agreement, and the judge could close the case, and after the case was concluded, the seizure would naturally be lifted, which was very simple!

An agreement was reached with the plaintiff, which needs to be approved by the court so that the house will not be seized. Now that the appeal has been brought to court, the court is going to close the case. With the agreement reached, there is no financial dispute between the parties, the court can accept the agreement, and the house will not be seized again.

It is necessary to report to the court, and it is impossible to unseal it if you settle it privately without the knowledge of the court, and you can go to the court with the plaintiff to apply for unsealing.

After reaching an agreement, the court will generally issue a mediation letter, and after the mediation agreement takes effect, the parties can apply for unsealing with the document.

This kind of unsealing is to inform the court of your agreement, and the court can only come forward to unseal it.

If an agreement is reached with the plaintiff, the plaintiff must go to court to dissolve.

After reaching an agreement, the plaintiff must go to the court to submit a written request to lift the seizure before the court will unseal the house.

All agreements reached need to be confirmed by the court to be effective, rather than being privately said to be counted.

If the agreement does not harm the national and public interests, it does not harm the interests of third parties. It does not violate the mandatory provisions of the law and the provisions of administrative regulations. shall be a valid agreement.

However, it should be noted that Article 19 of the Administrative Adjudication Procedures for Urban Housing Demolition stipulates that "if the demolition party fails to provide the demolished person with compensation funds for demolition or resettlement housing or turnover housing that meets the national quality and safety standards in accordance with the ruling, compulsory demolition shall not be carried out."

Before applying for administrative compulsory demolition, the housing demolition management department shall invite the relevant management department, representatives of the parties to the demolition and relocation, and representatives with social credibility, etc., to conduct a hearing on the basis, procedures, and calculation basis of compensation and resettlement standards for administrative compulsory demolition. The housing demolition management department applies for administrative compulsory demolition, and must be discussed and decided by the leadership before submitting an application for administrative compulsory demolition to **.

When it comes to some disputes, it is possible that the court needs to apply for property preservation, so can the plaintiff not go through this property preservation measure when the property preservation measure is lifted? Below, in order to help you better understand the relevant legal knowledge, I have compiled the following content, I hope it will be helpful to you.

Can the property be unseized without going through the plaintiff?1. The plaintiff's consent is usually required.

2. Article 31 of the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Sealing, Seizure, and Freezing of Assets in Civil Enforcement by the People's Courts" provides specific provisions on measures such as lifting the sealing: In any of the following circumstances, the people's court shall make a ruling on the lifting of the sealing, seizure, or freezing, and serve it on the person applying for enforcement, the person subject to enforcement, or a person not involved in the case: (1) sealing, seizing, or freezing the property of a person not involved in the case; (2) The person applying for enforcement withdraws the application for enforcement or waives the obligatory rights; (3) The sealed, seized or frozen property fails to be auctioned off or sold, and the applicant for enforcement and other enforcement creditors do not agree to accept the payment of debts; (4) The debt has already been paid off; (5) The person subject to enforcement provides a guarantee and the person applying for enforcement agrees to lift the sealing, seizure, or freezing; (6) Other circumstances where the People's Court finds that the sealing, seizure, or freezing should be lifted.

Based on the above contents, it can be concluded that the consent of the plaintiff is usually required, and the sealed, seized or frozen property fails to be auctioned or sold, and the applicant for enforcement and other enforcement creditors do not agree to accept the payment of debts, the people's court shall make a ruling to lift the sealing, seizure or freezing.

1. If it is agreed that if the buyer does not pay the house price within a certain period of time, the seller and the developer have the right to terminate the contract, then the court should support the plaintiff's developer's claim based on the contract, and if there is no such agreement between the parties, then the court should determine whether the developer has the right to terminate the contract based on other evidence.

2. When the jujube is severe, the above premise is that the house sale contract is valid, for example, if it is a small property right house, the sale and purchase contract is invalid, then the agreement between the two parties is invalid, and this kind of case is more complicated.

The house can be seized before the prosecution, let alone before the **, so it is legal to seize the house.

Article 101 of the Civil Procedure Law: Where an interested party fails to immediately apply for preservation due to an urgent situation, its lawful rights and interests will be irreparably harmed, it may apply to the people's court with the place where the property to be preserved, the domicile of the respondent, or the people's court with jurisdiction over the case is to take preservation measures before initiating a lawsuit or applying for arbitration. The applicant shall provide a guarantee, and if the applicant does not provide a guarantee, a ruling shall be made to reject the application.