本文選題：行政行為 + 公定力��； 參考：《復(fù)旦大學(xué)》2008年碩士論文

【摘要】： 在大陸法系國(guó)家,行政法是作為公法的一個(gè)重要法律部門而存在的。在我國(guó),行政法也是作為區(qū)別于民商法而存在的一個(gè)獨(dú)立部門法。這種區(qū)別是多方面的,其中就行政行為與民事法律行為而言,傳統(tǒng)行政法理論認(rèn)為,“行政行為最重要的特色在于,盡管是有瑕疵的行為,但這種行為也具有公定力,對(duì)方仍有服從的義務(wù)”。具體而言,行政行為的公定力,是指行政行為一經(jīng)作出,即對(duì)任何人都具有被推定為合法、有效而予以尊重的法律效力,“任何人均不得以自己之判斷而否認(rèn)其拘束力”。 然而,在我國(guó)行政法學(xué)界,對(duì)于行政行為公定力的認(rèn)識(shí)仍然存在爭(zhēng)議,歸納起來(lái),主要有完全公定力說(shuō)、公定力否定說(shuō)和有限公定力說(shuō)三種觀點(diǎn)。筆者認(rèn)為,有限公定力說(shuō)由于其邏輯結(jié)構(gòu)的周延性,較好地平衡了現(xiàn)代法治要求下維護(hù)行政秩序、效率與保障公民合法權(quán)益之間的關(guān)系,因而應(yīng)當(dāng)予以采納。但由于我國(guó)行政法學(xué)起步很晚,在理論上對(duì)于行政行為公定力問(wèn)題長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)未能予以充分重視,甚至存在著一些對(duì)公定力的錯(cuò)誤理解,從而導(dǎo)致行政行為效力理論的混亂。反映在立法和司法等實(shí)踐領(lǐng)域,一則行政行為公定力并沒(méi)有一個(gè)特定的法律規(guī)范加以明確規(guī)定;二則雖然在不同級(jí)別的法律規(guī)范中并不乏關(guān)于行政行為“無(wú)效”的規(guī)定,但其用語(yǔ)的外延十分寬泛,既包括行政行為的自始無(wú)效,也包括行政行為被撤銷、變更或廢止而失去效力,因而其涵義與行政法學(xué)上的無(wú)效行政行為并不等同:三則在司法實(shí)踐中,從最高人民法院發(fā)布的形形色色的批復(fù)、解釋中,也可以得出一個(gè)結(jié)論,即人民法院在民事訴訟中可以直接否定某些行政行為的效力,而對(duì)這些行政行為是否屬于行政法學(xué)上的無(wú)效行政行為未予明確區(qū)分。 針對(duì)上述情況,本文旨在通過(guò)對(duì)行政行為公定力理論的內(nèi)涵和外延加以研究,分析其理論依據(jù),明確行政行為公定力的界限,推而及之于司法實(shí)踐,進(jìn)一步分析行政行為因其具有公定力而對(duì)民事訴訟產(chǎn)生規(guī)范效應(yīng)的情況及該規(guī)范效應(yīng)的界限,并對(duì)目前民事訴訟中涉及行政行為效力的處理方式加以梳理。通過(guò)明確界定無(wú)效行政行為的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和范圍,以樹立在民事訴訟中除無(wú)效行政行為外,民事裁判應(yīng)受既有行政行為拘束,不得與之相抵觸的觀念,希望對(duì)解決上述混亂狀況有所助益。
[Abstract]:In civil law countries, administrative law exists as an important legal department of public law.In our country, administrative law is also an independent branch law which is different from civil and commercial law.There are many aspects in this distinction. In terms of administrative act and civil legal act, the traditional administrative law theory holds that "the most important characteristic of administrative act is that, although it is a defective act, this kind of behavior also has the power of public determination."The other party still has the obligation to obey. "Specifically, the public power of administrative act means that once administrative act is made, it has the legal effect of being presumed to be legal, valid and respected for any person. "No one can deny his binding power by his own judgment".However, in the field of administrative law in our country, there are still disputes about the public power of administrative act. In summary, there are three kinds of views: the theory of complete public power, the theory of negation of public power and the theory of limited public power.Reflected in such practical areas as legislation and justice, one administrative act has no specific legal norm to define it; the other is that there is no shortage of provisions on "invalidity" of administrative acts in different levels of legal norms.However, the denotation of its terms is very broad, including the invalidity of the administrative act from the beginning, but also the nullification, alteration or annulment of the administrative act.Therefore, its meaning is not equal to the invalid administrative act in the administrative law. Third, in judicial practice, a conclusion can also be drawn from the various written replies and interpretations issued by the Supreme people's Court.That is, the people's court can directly deny the effectiveness of certain administrative acts in civil proceedings, but it does not clearly distinguish whether these administrative acts belong to the invalid administrative acts in the administrative jurisprudence.In view of the above situation, the purpose of this paper is to study the connotation and extension of the theory of public power of administrative act, to analyze its theoretical basis, to define the limits of the public power of administrative act, and to push it to judicial practice.This paper further analyzes the normative effect of administrative action on civil action because of its public power and the limits of the normative effect, and combs the treatment methods involving administrative action effectiveness in civil litigation at present.By clearly defining the standard and scope of invalid administrative act, the concept that civil judgment should be bound by the existing administrative act and must not conflict with it is established in civil litigation except for invalid administrative act.Hopefully, it will help resolve this mess.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：復(fù)旦大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2008
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 高讓;行政行為公定力與行政訴訟關(guān)聯(lián)制度問(wèn)題研究[D];青島大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1741379