本文選題：明顯不當(dāng)　切入點(diǎn)：合法性　出處：《遼寧大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：在全面推進(jìn)依法治國的背景下,準(zhǔn)確定位明顯不當(dāng)行政行為,并加強(qiáng)規(guī)范與制約,是堅(jiān)持依法治國、依法執(zhí)政、依法行政共同推進(jìn)的具體要求。新修訂的《中華人民共和國行政訴訟法》(以下簡稱《行政訴訟法》)將明顯不當(dāng)行政行為列入了司法審查范圍。本文共分三個(gè)部分對明顯不當(dāng)行政行為進(jìn)行了研究和探討:第一部分為“明顯不當(dāng)”的含義與性質(zhì)辨析。關(guān)于“明顯不當(dāng)”的含義,要從《行政訴訟法》第70條規(guī)定的整體上把握,明顯不當(dāng)意味著行政行為不僅不能違反法律、法規(guī)等的明文規(guī)定,還不能與一般人所應(yīng)具有的常理、常識、常情以及行政法中人們認(rèn)可的各種規(guī)則、原則、行政慣例、立法目的與立法精神等相悖。關(guān)于“明顯不當(dāng)”的性質(zhì),學(xué)界有兩種觀點(diǎn),一種認(rèn)為“明顯不當(dāng)”屬于合理性的范疇,實(shí)為不合理的行政行為,一種觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為“明顯不當(dāng)”屬于合法性的范疇。筆者持第二種觀點(diǎn)。合理性與合法性之間沒有不可逾越的鴻溝,不當(dāng)行政行為屬于違反了合理性,當(dāng)這種違反程度超越了合理性的邊界,就成為違反合法性的問題,成為違法行政行為。第二部分為“明顯不當(dāng)”適用范圍及判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。在排除了“明顯不當(dāng)”在事實(shí)問題、法律適用問題、程序問題中的適用余地后,得出“明顯不當(dāng)”適用于對行政行為實(shí)體內(nèi)容的審查。判斷是否構(gòu)成“明顯不當(dāng)”應(yīng)從行政行為是否違反平等原則、比例原則、正當(dāng)程序原則以及行政慣例和公共政策的角度進(jìn)行考量。第三部分是關(guān)于針對明顯不當(dāng)行政行為裁判方式的選擇問題�，F(xiàn)行《行政訴訟法》規(guī)定了法院對明顯不當(dāng)?shù)男姓袨榭梢宰鞒龀蜂N判決或撤銷重作判決,對明顯不當(dāng)?shù)男姓幜P可以判決變更。無論是撤銷判決還是變更判決,都有其存在的合理性和必要性,又存在有待完善之處。
[Abstract]:Under the background of comprehensively promoting governing the country according to law, it is necessary to accurately position obvious improper administrative acts and strengthen norms and restrictions, which is to persist in governing the country according to law and ruling by law. The newly revised Administrative Litigation Law of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Litigation Law) has included obvious improper administrative acts in the scope of judicial review. This article is divided into three parts. This paper studies and discusses the obvious improper administrative behavior: the first part is the analysis of the meaning and nature of "obviously improper", and the meaning of "obviously improper". To grasp from the overall point of view the provisions of Article 70 of the "Administrative Litigation Law", obviously improper means that administrative acts should not only not violate the express provisions of the laws, regulations, etc., but also cannot have the common sense and common sense that ordinary people should have. The commonsense and the rules, principles, administrative practices, legislative purposes and the spirit of legislation which are recognized by people in administrative law are contrary to each other. There are two views on the nature of "obviously improper". An administrative act that considers "manifestly inappropriate" to be reasonable and unreasonable. The author holds the second view that there is no insurmountable gap between rationality and legitimacy, and that improper administrative conduct is a violation of rationality. When the degree of such violation exceeds the boundary of rationality, it becomes the issue of violation of legality and illegal administrative act. The second part is the scope of application and judgment standard of "manifestly improper". After the application of the law and the scope of application in the procedure, it is concluded that "manifestly improper" is applicable to the examination of the content of the entity of the administrative act. The judgment of whether the administrative act constitutes "manifestly improper" should be based on whether the administrative act violates the principle of equality and the principle of proportionality. The principle of due process and the perspective of administrative practice and public policy are taken into consideration. The third part deals with the choice of adjudication methods for manifestly improper administrative conduct. When the administrative act may be annulled or rescinded, The administrative punishment which is obviously improper can be changed by judgment. Whether the decision is revoked or the judgment is changed, there is the rationality and necessity of its existence, and there are still some things to be perfected.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 史筆;曹晟;;新《行政訴訟法》中行政行為“明顯不當(dāng)”的審查與判斷[J];法律適用;2016年08期

2 楊登峰;;從合理原則走向統(tǒng)一的比例原則[J];中國法學(xué);2016年03期

3 蔡維專;;對行政訴訟法中明顯不當(dāng)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的思考[J];人民司法(應(yīng)用);2016年16期

4 何海波;;論行政行為“明顯不當(dāng)”[J];法學(xué)研究;2016年03期

5 劉欣琦;;新《行政訴訟法》實(shí)施后重作判決適用探析[J];政治與法律;2016年05期

6 張峰振;;不當(dāng)行政行為的危害及救濟(jì)必要性[J];決策與信息;2016年02期

7 程丹丹;;行政訴訟司法變更權(quán)的新發(fā)展——兼評《行政訴訟法》第77條之規(guī)定[J];安徽行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2015年05期

8 滕亞為;康勇;;論行政訴訟變更判決的適用范圍——兼評新《行政訴訟法》第70條[J];重慶理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué));2015年10期

9 張鵬;;明顯不當(dāng)?shù)男姓袨閼?yīng)予撤銷[J];山東審判;2015年03期

10 張兵;;新《行政訴訟法》有關(guān)判決方式的文本解讀[J];福建行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2015年02期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前2條

1 張建平;;明顯不當(dāng)與濫用職權(quán)之辨識[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2016年

2 蔡小雪;;淺談濫用職權(quán)與明顯不當(dāng)?shù)膮^(qū)別[N];人民法院報(bào);2001年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 朱志林;我國2015年新行政訴訟法判決類型研究[D];湘潭大學(xué);2015年

，

本文編號：1568730