论文部分内容阅读
案例某会计师事务所长期用作经营场地的公有非居住房屋,于2009年被列入拆迁范围。该房屋所有权一直由某财政局所有。会计师事务所原属财政局系统企业,由财政局将该房屋划拨给其用作经营场地。后会计师事务所与财政局脱钩,但未对该房屋的所有权向房管部门申请变更。由于拆迁的安置、补偿带来利益,财政局与会计师事务所在谁为被拆迁人的问题上产生了纠纷。会计师事务所诉称:我们直接与某拆迁公司签订动迁协议,在
Case A public accounting firm has long been used as a public venue for non-residential public housing, in 2009 was included in the scope of demolition. Ownership of the house has always been a financial bureau. The accounting firm was originally a system enterprise of the Financial Bureau, and the Finance Bureau allocated the house to it for use as a business venue. Post accounting firm decoupled from the Finance Bureau, but did not apply for change of ownership of the house to the Housing Authority. Due to the relocation and resettlement, the benefits brought by the compensation bring disputes between the Finance Bureau and the accounting firms on who the demolished people are. Accounting firms allege: We directly with a demolition company signed a relocation agreement, at