Judicial Application of the Government's Duty to Perform its Commitments under Private Sector Promotion Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/z4mx3f44Keywords:
Private Economy Promotion Law, Government Performance of Commitments, Government-enterprise Contract, Reliance Interest, Relief for LossAbstract
Articles 70 and 73 of Private Sector Promotion Law turn the performance of lawful policy commitments and government-enterprise contracts into a statutory obligation owed to private economic organizations. Even so, these provisions continue to work with the existing rules of civil and administrative law. Courts must first decide whether an agreement is administrative or civil. They must then ask how the law deals with four situations: a lawful change in the public interest, unlawful non-performance, objective impossibility, and an invalid agreement or clause. Based on decided cases and a textual and systematic reading, this article submits that the word "contract" in Articles 70 and 73 includes both administrative agreements and civil contracts. The rules applied, however, still depend on the nature of the legal relationship. Article 73 addresses "non-performance" only. An unlawful modification or termination must therefore be assessed under Article 70(1) and the rules of the relevant branch of law. Relief likewise depends on the applicable form of liability. The expectation interest, reliance interest, and actual expenditures should each receive a separate scope of protection.
Downloads
References
[1] National Development and Reform Commission & Supreme People's Court. (2026, May 20). Notice on issuing the typical cases on implementing Private Sector Promotion Law (First Batch) (Fa Gai Min Ying [2026] No. 708). https://www. court. gov. cn/zixun/xiangqing/500531.html.
[2] Supreme People's Court. (2025, May 30). Nanyang X Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. and Nanyang Municipal People's Government et al. (Administrative Retrial Judgment, (2025) Zui Gao Fa Xing Zai 58).
[3] High People's Court of Fujian Province. (2026, April 20). Zhangzhou Company A Co., Ltd. v. Longhai District People's Government of Zhangzhou Municipality (Second Instance Administrative Judgment on an Administrative Agreement, (2025) Min Xing Zhong 520).
[4] Zhang, C. (2021). On the nature and types of the power to modify or terminate administrative agreements. Peking University Law Journal, (2), 465–483. (In Chinese)
[5] Zhang, Q. (2021). Judicial review of administrative organs' modification or termination of administrative agreements. Law and Economy, (6), 97–110. (In Chinese)
[6] Yu, L. (2025). On administrative prerogatives in administrative agreements. China Legal Science, (4), 86–106. (In Chinese)
[7] Zeng, S. (2025). The scope of compensation upon termination of an administrative agreement. Journal of Shandong University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), (5), 128–139. (In Chinese)
[8] Yu, L. (2003). Protection of legitimate expectations in administrative law. Social Sciences in China, (3), 128–139. (In Chinese)
[9] Intermediate People's Court of Yichang Municipality, Hubei Province. (2017, October 16). Changyang Huoshaoping Water Supply Co., Ltd. v. Huoshaoping Township People's Government of Changyang Tujia Autonomous County (Administrative Judgment Concerning a Water Supply Concession Agreement, (2017) E 05 Xing Zhong 155).
[10] Intermediate People's Court of Wuhu Municipality, Anhui Province. (2016, September 14). Nanling Huiling Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. v. Nanling County People's Government and Nanling County Land and Resources Bureau (First Instance Civil Judgment Concerning a Contract for the Grant of the Right to Use State Owned Construction Land, (2016) Wan 02 Min Chu 21).
[11] People's Court of Bei'an Municipality, Heilongjiang Province. (2020, September 10). Heilongjiang Dawei Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. v. Tongbei Township People's Government of Bei'an Municipality (First Instance Civil Judgment Concerning a Construction Contract, (2020) Hei 1181 Min Chu 1453).
[12] People's Court of Kaijiang County, Sichuan Province. (2021, June 21). Dachuan Shengpeng Investment Co., Ltd. v. Kaijiang County Natural Resources Bureau (First Instance Civil Judgment Concerning a Contract Dispute, (2021) Chuan 1723 Min Chu 880).
[13] Intermediate People's Court of Guigang Municipality, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. (2018, September 28). Guiping Jiuzhou Aluminum Technology Development Co., Ltd., Guiping Municipal People's Government, and Guiping Chang'an Economic Management Committee (Administrative Judgment, (2016) Gui 08 Xing Chu 249).
[14] People's Court of Daye Municipality, Hubei Province. (2021, April 19). Hubei Daye Boxin Parking Management Co., Ltd. v. Daye Urban Management and Law Enforcement Bureau (Administrative Compensation Judgment, (2019) E 0281 Xing Pei Chu 5).
[15] People's Court of Haicheng Municipality, Liaoning Province. (2018, January 26). Xiuyan Manchu Autonomous County Jiahe Motor Vehicle Inspection Co., Ltd. v. Xiuyan Manchu Autonomous County Environmental Protection Bureau and Xiuyan Manchu Autonomous County Motor Vehicle Emissions Management Office (Administrative Judgment, (2017) Liao 0381 Xing Chu 47).
[16] People's Court of Jiayu County, Hubei Province. (2016, May 23). Jiayu Chaochang Water Supply Co., Ltd. v. Dupu Township People's Government of Jiayu County (First Instance Civil Judgment Concerning a Water Supply Operation Contract, (2016) E 1221 Min Chu 59).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Academic Journal of Management and Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
