本文選題：指導(dǎo)案例 + 類型��； 參考：《重慶大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版)》2017年06期

【摘要】：行政訴訟指導(dǎo)案例具有統(tǒng)一司法尺度、明確法律規(guī)范的含義等作用。目前,最高法院遴選的行政訴訟指導(dǎo)存在裁判要點(diǎn)提煉水平較低、"帶病"入選情況嚴(yán)重、輕視權(quán)利救濟(jì)的思維嚴(yán)重以及重復(fù)或變相重復(fù)法律法規(guī)和司法解釋等四大弊端,從而使得指導(dǎo)案例與其應(yīng)有功能相去甚遠(yuǎn)。為此,可考慮就以下四方面從深度和廣度上進(jìn)行改進(jìn),以體現(xiàn)指導(dǎo)案例的應(yīng)有功能:(1)加強(qiáng)對(duì)指導(dǎo)案例的研究以提高裁判要點(diǎn)的提煉水平;(2)建立指導(dǎo)案例公示制度以防止"帶病"入選;(3)堅(jiān)持權(quán)利救濟(jì)導(dǎo)向以糾正偏重權(quán)力監(jiān)督的目標(biāo)偏好;(4)突出裁判要點(diǎn)的先導(dǎo)功能以避免重復(fù)或變相重復(fù)法規(guī)和司法解釋。
[Abstract]:The guiding cases of administrative litigation have the function of unifying the judicial yardstick and clarifying the meaning of legal norms. At present, there are four disadvantages in the guidance of administrative litigation selected by the Supreme Court, such as the low level of abstracting judgment points, the serious selection of "ill", the serious thinking of despising the right relief, the repeated or disguised repetition of laws and regulations and the judicial interpretation. Thus, the guiding case is far from its proper function. To this end, consideration could be given to improving the depth and breadth of the following four areas: (1) strengthen the research on guiding cases to improve the refining level of judgment points / 2) establish a system of publicity of guiding cases to prevent "disease" from being selected to 3) insist on the right relief guide to correct the bias of power The objective preference of force supervision is to emphasize the leading function of judgment points in order to avoid repetition of laws and judicial interpretations.
【作者單位】： 重慶工商大學(xué)重慶廉政研究中心;
【基金】：重慶市社科規(guī)劃(博士)項(xiàng)目(2014BS044) 2015年度中國(guó)博士后科學(xué)基金項(xiàng)目(2015M582510) 2016年度重慶市博士后特別資助項(xiàng)目(Xm2016100)
【分類號(hào)】：D925.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 付楊;論我國(guó)的行政訴訟政策[D];鄭州大學(xué);2017年

2 楊偉萍;行政訴訟交叉集中管轄制度研究[D];廣西大學(xué);2017年

3 董曉U，

本文編號(hào)：1854008