我国行政诉讼类型化研究

【作者】 刘继霞；

【导师】 苗连营；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 法律， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 在我国，行政诉讼类型尚是一个较新的课题，法学界对此研究也比较少。笔者尝试对其作较简单、系统的分析、探讨，以便对我国行政诉讼制度的构建增砖添瓦。全文除引言外，分四章、余论五部分组成。第一章是关于行政诉讼类型的概述。主要探讨行政诉讼类型的概念、分类、功能、意义等。本章在探讨行政诉讼类型的概念时，认为诉讼类型与诉的种类不同，诉的种类是根据诉讼当事人的请求内容对起诉进行的分类，而诉讼类型是依据诉讼全过程的一定标准对整个诉讼活动进行的分类。因此，笔者在广义上把行政诉讼类型的概念界定为：对具有相同的诉讼构成要素，适用相同的审理规则和方式，且作出相应的判决的诉讼分类称为行政诉讼的类型，又可称为行政诉讼的种类。行政诉讼类型的意义表现在理论和实践两个方面。行政诉讼类型化理论上是按照一定的标准对社会纠纷进行归类总结，以为相应诉讼救济途径的设计或者诉讼体系漏洞的弥补奠定社会实证基础。行政诉讼类型化在实践上意义更加突出：一是为当事人提供适当的救济途径和模式；二是有利于行政审判权的有效运行；三是有利于行政诉讼结构和程序的优化；四是有利于推进我国的行政法治和法制化的公共秩序形成。行政诉讼类型的功能，除具备诉讼的一般功能外，还具有四个方面的特有功能：一是能够加强公民公法上权利的保护；二是能够强化法院司法审查的力度；三是可使行政诉讼法及相应的制度系统化；四是能够使行政法学与行政诉讼法学的理论研究进一步深化。第三章是国外行政诉讼类型比较。首先介绍了主要大陆法系国家的行政诉讼类型。法国传统的分类，分为完全管辖权之诉、撤销之诉、解释及审查行政决定的意义和合法性之诉、处罚之诉，而依诉讼标的性质又分为主观诉讼和客观诉讼。德国行政诉讼则明确分为撤销诉讼、确认诉讼、课予义务诉讼、其他形成诉讼、一般给付诉讼、继续确认诉讼及其他新的诉讼种类。日本的行政诉讼类型分为抗告诉讼、当事人诉讼、民众诉讼和机关诉讼。其次介绍了英美法系国家的行政诉讼类型即司法审查形式。英国的司法审查形式为一般救济诉讼与例外救济诉讼，表现为各种令状。美国的司法审查为法定的审查和非法定的审查，执行诉讼中的司法审查和宪法权利的司法审查等等。从上述分析行政诉讼类型可以概括为两大模式，即英美模式和大陆模式，两者具有不同的特点。第三章是对我国行政诉讼类型现状的评析。首先根据有关学者的观点，对我国行政诉讼类型进行分析，认为由于我国行政诉讼法未明确规定诉讼类型，加之理论界归纳出的诉讼类型的内涵又过于狭窄，故在行政和司法实务中暴露出许多不足。其次分析影响我国行政诉讼类型的因素，以确定我国行政诉讼类型界定的标准。文章认为影响行政诉讼类型的因素很多，诸如当事人的诉讼请求、行政争议与行政行为的性质、当事人的适格、行政诉讼的目的、司法审查的权力范围及公共利益与私人利益的关系等。第四章是我国行政诉讼类型的构建。主要探讨行政撤销诉讼、行政确认诉讼、课予义务诉讼、行政给付诉讼和抽象行政行为审查诉讼五种类型的有关内容，并对相关问题进行分析。第一，关于行政撤销诉讼。主要分析撤销诉讼的概念、适用范围、诉讼要件、审理及判决。在分析我国目前行政撤销诉讼的适用范围之后，认为这一范围应当扩大，应将内部行政行为及准行政行为纳入撤销诉讼。因为撤销诉讼撤销的是行政机关的具体行政行为，所以撤销诉讼必须具备一定的条件，即须有具体行政行为存在，且侵犯了原告的合法权益，并在法定的期间内提起诉讼等。撤销诉讼中的举证责任由被告承担。法院原则上不得依职权主动调查取证。对撤销诉讼的审理，法院依情况可以作出撤销判决、变更判决、驳回诉讼请求判决和情况判决。第二，关于行政确认诉讼。主要分析行政确认诉讼的概念、适用范围、诉讼要件和判决。行政确认诉讼是行政相对人欲通过法院确认其与被诉行政机关具有争议状念的具体行政行为是否违法、无效，行政法律关系是否存在。确认具体行政行为无效或违法之诉的诉讼要件有：确认的对象须是具体行政行为无效或违法，确认其无效或违法须先经行政程序，须有即受确认判决保护的法律上的利益。确认行政法律关系存在与否之诉的诉讼要件有：确认的对象须是行政法律关系成立或不成立；须有即受确认判决保护的法律上的利益；须已不能提起其它诉讼。法院作出的判决为确认判决。第三，关于课予义务诉讼。主要分析课予义务诉讼的概念、适用范围、诉讼要件、审理及判决。课予义务诉讼的诉讼标的是行政不作为，可分为不纯粹的不作为之课予义务诉讼和纯粹的不作为之课予义务诉讼两种。不纯粹的不作为的课予义务诉讼的诉讼要件有：行政相对人提起诉讼之标的是某一特定的具体行政行为；已经向行政机关提出申请；请求因行政机关的拒绝，致使其合法权益受到损害；而且在法定期间内起诉。纯粹的不作为的课予义务诉讼应具备的诉讼要件有：行政相对人提起诉讼之标的是某一特定的具体行政行为；已经向行政机关提出申请；请求因行政机关之不作为而使其合法权益受到损害；且是行政机关没有充足理由在法定期间内未作出实体决定。该两种诉讼的举证责任的分配不同，前一种由被告负举证责任，后一种则视情况而定，必要时由原告负举证责任。法院审查对前一种诉讼进行实质性审查，并可以作出要求被告履行特定内容的判决；而对后一种只进行形式性审查，并且作出要求被告在一定期限内履行义务的判决。第四，关于行政给付诉讼。主要分析行政给付诉讼的概念、适用范围和种类、应具备的诉讼要件、审理和判决。行政给付诉讼是对课予义务诉讼的补充。行政给付诉讼主要适用于行政给付中的财产给付、行政合同、事实行为等，相应地分为财产上的给付诉讼、非财产上的给付诉讼、行政合同给付诉讼和预防的不作为诉讼等。行政给付诉讼的诉讼要件有：原告起诉之标的是财产上的给付或具体行政行为以外的其他非财产上的给付，应证实被告违反给付义务损害了自己的合法权益；应是在撤销诉讼中不能合并请求的给付；经过了先行程序；在法定期间内提起诉讼。在行政给付诉讼中，一概强调行政机关负举证责任是不客观的，而应根据实际情况，由行政相对人或行政机关承担举证责任。在原告举证不能的情况下，法院应尽可能地依职权调取证据。审理行政案件不适用调解是我国行政诉讼的一项基本原则，但笔者认为应当针对不同的行政行为的类型、不同的诉讼种类而采取相应的措施，不应一概否定调解，只要调解不损害国家、社会和他人利益，有利于案件的迅速解决，有利于和谐社会的构建就应当允许。法院在行政给付诉讼中可作出给付判决或驳回诉讼请求判决。第五，关于抽象行政行为审查之诉。主要分析抽象行政行为的概念及纳入行政诉讼的必要性和可行性。抽象行政行为是指行政机关针对不特定多数人制定的可以反复适用的颁布后发生法律效力的规范性文件的行为。从行政诉讼司法实践和当前形势的发展，将抽象行政行为纳入行政诉讼是非常必要的。抽象行政行为之诉的范围是行政法规(不包括行政法规)以下的抽象行政行为。起诉条件是行政相对人必须以合法权益受到影响为前提条件。在诉讼类型上可提起行政确认诉讼，法院可作出驳回诉讼请求判决或确认判决。第六，关于行政诉讼类型的相关问题。主要分析我国应否设立公益诉讼和行政附带民事诉讼。首先分析了设立公益诉讼的必要性和可行性，进而明确由检察机关作为原告提起诉讼，法院依据相应诉讼类型的审理规则进行审理，并作出相应的判决。其次分析了行政附带民事诉讼问题，认为当事人诉讼不宜确立为我国的行政诉讼类型，应以行政附带民事诉讼作为解决民事、行政交叉争议的相关补充。行政附带民事诉讼的适用范围是对于行政裁决、行政确认、行政许可等行政行为不服提起的诉讼。并对行政附带民事诉讼的诉讼要件、审理程序、举证责任及判决方式等进行了分析。余论是诉讼类型化与中国行政诉讼法的修改。值此行政诉讼法修改之际，提出一些立法建议，为完善我国的行政诉讼类型制度做一点贡献。更多还原

【Abstract】 The administrative litigation mode is a comparatively new subject not gaining enough study in the field of jurisprudence of china now. This article is intended to carry out an elementary but systematic analysis of it, only to do some good to the construction of China’s administrative proceedings system.Except foe forewords, this article is divided into 5 chapters. Chapter one is concerned with the outline of the administrative litigation mode, which mainly involves its classification, concept, function and meaning, etc. in this chapter, the mode of litigation is rigidly distinguished from the sort of litigation when the meaning of administrative litigation mode is probe into. The sort of litigation is classified in allusion to the whole litigation. The author of this article defines the mode of administrative law in a wide sense: it refers to the mode, with the same constructive elements, which apply to the same trial rules and types, and makes appropriate sentences. It also can be called the category of administrative litigation.The meaning of the mode of administrative litigation embodied theoretically and practically. In theory, the mode of administrative litigation is classified and concluded to social disputes according to a certain standard. The basis of social concrete evidence has been founded by the make-up of litigation system and the design of proceeding remedy. In practice, the outstanding part of the mode of administrative litigation lies in the following points: first, provide appropriate remedy mode and method for litigants; second, help the effective running of administration; third, help the optimizing of the structure and procedure of administrative litigation; forth, help the formation of our country’s legal system.Except for the basic functions, the functions of the administrative litigation are showing as follows: first, shows in the protecting of citizen’s rights; second, shows in the systematically administrative litigation; forth, shows in the deepening theoretical research on administrative litigation.The second chapter concerns the comparison of foreign country’s administrative litigation modes. In France, According to the traditional classification, it is classified into complete jurisdiction lawsuit; repeal lawsuit, lawsuit of interpretation and review of administrative decisions’ significance and validity, sanction lawsuit. According to the subject matter, it is classified into subjective lawsuit and objective lawsuit. According to the Federal Administrative Court of Germany, it is clearly classified into regulates lawsuit, validation lawsuit, demanding-performance-of-liabilities lawsuit, other shaping suit, average performance lawsuit, continuative validation lawsuit, and other new kinds of lawsuits. In Japan, the mode of administrative litigation is classified into counter-appeal lawsuit, parties lawsuit, democracy lawsuit and administrative organ lawsuit in its Act of Administrative Proceedings. Then, the author introduced the judicial review; the mode belongs to the civil law system. The forms of judicial review of England can be classified into the average relief lawsuit and the exceptional relief lawsuit, which are very different in the form of writ. Judicial review of USA is mainly classified into statutory review and non-statutory review. Non-statutory review adopts the writ system of England. Furthermore, some special judicial review forms were produced in USA.The third chapter concerns the remarks on our country’s administrative litigation mode. First, in term of the expert’s ideas, this article studies classified our country’s administrative litigation mode. The author pointed out that because the administrative proceedings mode is not regulated in China’s Administrative Proceedings Law and the meaning of the administrative proceedings mode concluded by the academic circle is too narrow, a lot of problems emerge in administrative and judicial practice. Then, this article analyzed the elements which can influence our country’s administrative litigation mode, to determine the standard defined by our country. As to the standard of administrative proceedings, the dissertation says that there are a lot of factors which influences the administrative proceedings mode, such as political system, economic base, cultural tradition, aim of academic proceedings, parties’ solicitation, sort of administrative act, the kind of the right the administrative counterpart owns in term of administrative law, etc;Chapter four concerns the construction of our country’s administrative litigation mode. It mainly discussed the related content of repeal lawsuit, validation lawsuit, demanding-performance-of-liabilities lawsuit , administrative validation lawsuit, and analyzing some related problems.Firstly, discuss administrative repeal lawsuit. It mainly analyzes its meaning, its scope of being applied, special litigation elements, acceptance and hearing, and decisions. As to the application scope, the dissertation points that it is too narrow after analyzing the status quo and suggest that the special-power-relation of the internal administrative act and the quasi-administrative act should be ascribed into the scope of repeal lawsuit. The special elements of repeal lawsuit are: the existence of the specific administrative act, the plaintiff’s claim of the specific administrative act’s violating the law and impairing his legal right or interest, the plaintiff’s litigation within a certain legal period. During the course of repeal lawsuit, the defendant assumes the burden of proof, and in principle the court is forbidden to investigate evidence actively. In addition, the main forms of decisions the court can adopt are repeal decision, rectification decision, solicitation-rejecting decision and condition decision.Secondly, discuss administrative affirmation lawsuit. It mainly analyzes its meaning, its scope of being applied, special litigation elements, acceptance and hearing and decisions. The lawsuit of this kind is aimed to judge the validity of a certain specific administrative act being and the existence of a certain administrative legal relation. The application scope falls on the invalidation or irregularity of a certain specific administrative act and the existence of a certain administrative legal relation. The special litigation elements of invalidation-or- irregularity-affirmation lawsuit are: the subject matter of being affirmed is the invalidation or irregularity of a certain specific administrative act; antecedent procedures must be carried through; the plaintiff should claim that his legal right and interest has been impaired because of the defendant’s violation. The special litigation elements of existence-of-administrative-legal-relationship lawsuit are: the subject matter of being affirmed is the existence of a certain administrative legal relation; the plaintiff s legal right and interest has been impaired because of the defendant’ s violation; the plaintiff can’ t institute other lawsuits. The decision the court should make is affirmation decision.Thirdly, discuss demanding-performance-of-liabilities lawsuit. It mainly analyzes its meaning, its scope of being applied, special litigation elements, trial and sentences. The subject matter of the lawsuit of this kind is non-performance of administrative act, including non-performance of burdening administrative act and granting administrative act. Demanding-performance-of-liabilities lawsuit can be classified into that of incomplete non-performance and that of complete non-performance.The special lawsuit elements of the lawsuit of this kind is non-performance of administrative act include that: the lawsuit subject matter that the plaintiff litigates is a certain specific administrative act; the plaintiff has applied for the administrative organ; the plaintiff should claim that his legal right and interest has been impaired because of the administrative refusal to perform its duty; the litigation should be brought in a certain legal period. Comparing these two kinds’ lawsuit, there are different assumption of burden of proof: as to the former, the defendant has assumed the burden of proof, while, as to the latter, the plaintiff is to assume the burden of proof in a certain circumstance; the court can substantially review the incomplete non-performance and make a decision to require the defendant to perform its specific duty, while the court can review the incomplete non-performance only in a formalistic way and make the decision to require the defendant to perform his duty in a certain period.Fourthly, discuss administrative granting lawsuit. It mainly analyzes its meaning, its scope of being applied and sort, special litigation elements, acceptance and hearing and decisions. The main difference between administrative granting lawsuit and demanding-performance-of-liabilities lawsuit lies in their scope of being applied: the latter is applied to the specific administrative act the administrative organ makes, while the former is applied to what is excluded from the demanding-performance-of-liabilities lawsuit. So, in some sense, the former is supplementary to the latter. The administrative granting lawsuit is mainly applied to wealth granting, administrative contract, factual act and so on. Accordingly, it is classified into wealth granting lawsuit, non-wealth granting lawsuit, and administrative contract granting lawsuit and precautionary non-performance lawsuit and so on. The special litigation elements of lawsuit of this kind are: the lawsuit subject matter that the plaintiff litigates should be wealth granting or non-wealth granting which down’ t belong to specific administrative act; the plaintiff should claim that his legal right and interest has been impaired because of the defendant’ s violation to perform its duty; the solicitation can’ t be put forward along in repeal lawsuit; antecedent procedures must be carried through; the litigation should be brought in a certain legal period. During the course of the lawsuit of this kind, the defendant’s burden of proof should not be always emphasized too much. However, the assumption of burden of proof should be assigned to the plaintiff and the defendant according to the factual conditions. When the defendant can’t fulfill his burden of proof, the court should try all out to help to investigate proof. There is a basic principle in Administrative Proceedings Law of China that mediation should be forbidden. But this dissertation claims that mediation can be applied to a certain kind of administrative act and a certain sort of administrative proceedings. The administrative organ should have substantial determination power in a certain situation, if the applications of mediation don’t impair the interest of the government, the society and other citizens. Certainly mediation should be forbidden in virtue of solving the case and controversies quickly. The court can make a granting-offering decision or a solicitation-rejecting decision.Fifthly, discuss the review of abstract administrative act. It mainly analyzed the concept of abstract administrative act and the necessarities to be adopted in administration litigation. Abstract action is an executive, specific and repeated regulative act to a majority of people. From the administrative proceedings judicial practice and the current situation of development, it is necessary to take abstract administrative act into litigation. The scope of the proceedings of abstract administrative litigation is the abstract administrative act below administrative regulations. The precondition of prosecution is the legal rights and interests which have been influenced .In terms of litigation modes, administrative affirmation lawsuit can be taken and also can be dismissed or affirmed by the court.Sixthly, discuss on the related issues of administrative litigation modes. The author mainly analyzed the establishment of public interest litigation and administrative incidental civil. Firstly, the establishment and feasibility of public interest litigation, and then make clear those procurator organs mentioned as a plaintiff prosecution, and sentenced by courts. Secondly, the author analyzes the administrative incidental civil issues, and point out that the parties to the proceedings should not be set as our country’s administrative litigation. The administrative incidental civil should be attached to civil administration as a solution and additional part to the civil and administrative disputes. The administrative incidental civil is a lawsuit for those who don’t accept the following administrative acts: administrative decisions, administrative affirmation and administrative permission, etc. the author also analyzed the component elements to the proceeding requirements, procedures, the responsibility and the way to sentence. The last part concerns the administrative litigation modes and the revision of China’s Administrative Procedure Law. In the end, the author put forward some legislative suggestions to perfect our country’s administrative litigation mode system.更多还原