美国法上的行政不作为司法审查研究

发布时间：2018-05-07 18:53

本文选题：行政不作为 + 美国行政法　；参考：《浙江工商大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：从二十世纪八十年代至今,我国行政法学界对于美国行政法的研究从美国行政法基本制度框架的整理和译介,到晚近着力于探讨这些制度的历史流脉和发展趋势,大致历经了筚路蓝缕、初具雏形和精耕细作三个阶段。然而,在众多的美国行政法的文献著述中,却鲜有涉及美国行政不作为及其司法审查的研究,盖因美国法中的不作为司法审查本身仍是一个较为混乱的领域。本文正是基于此,试图对美国行政不作为及其司法审查制度进行初步梳理,将不作为司法审查领域的基本问题进行分解,简单回顾了不同时期美国司法审查的状况,分析不作为的产生及法院不愿审查的背景,通过典型性判例的解读,探析在不同的行政不作为类型中,法院审查遇到的障碍及其相应的审查态度及审查标准,展现了法院对不同类型不作为区别对待的严谨态度。最后,展望了随着行政法理论与实践的更新,行政不作为司法审查的积极审查转向已初现端倪。本文第一部分首先介绍了美国各个行政法时期尤其是新政之后司法审查领域的变迁,梳理了传统模式时期、专家管制模式时期、利益代表模式时期以及分析管理模式时期美国法院司法审查的侧重领域。文章还透析了司法能动主义与司法克制主义对司法审查领域变迁过程的影响和作用。本文第二部分阐述了美国行政不作为司法审查的基本制度。从法规范学和解释学的角度,对美国法上的行政不作为概念和定义进行了分析和比较,同时阐明了行政不作为产生的社会背景。在此基础上，第二部分介绍了行政程序法对行政不作为司法审查的规定。文章第三部分首先梳理了美国法上对行政行为从不可审查到可审查态度的转变,进而论述了法院对于行政不作为这一特殊的行政行为采取不愿审查的保守的司法态度,这一态度主要反映在最高法院的一个经典判例Chaney案。在本部分最后还对该案的判决进行了全面的批判式的解读。第四部分依循第三部分的逻辑,对美国法院为什么不愿审查进行了剖析,从理论层面和制度层面阐释了法院的考虑,重点介绍了法院在审查行政不作为时所注重的原告资格、终局性标准和自由裁量权标准三个方面的标准,这也是本文的核心所在。第五部分将视角重新定位至前文所述的Chaney案,通过该案判决的限制引导出行政不作为另一个重要领域—制规不作为的司法审查,阐述了与一般行政不作为传统的司法审查态度不一样,法院对制规不作为采取相对更为宽松的态度。文章最后指出了晚近行政不作为司法审查态度的积极转向,学界以及法院自身要求改变不作为司法审查消极态度的呼声日益增高,反映了今后一段时间内不作为司法审查制度的一个发展趋势和方向。
[Abstract]:From the 1980s to the present, the study of American administrative law in the field of administrative law in our country has changed from the arrangement and translation of the basic institutional framework of administrative law in the United States to the recent efforts to explore the historical vein and development trend of these systems. It has experienced three stages of painstaking, initial embryonic and intensive cultivation. However, among many American administrative law literature, there are few researches on American administrative omission and its judicial review. The judicial review of omission in American law itself is still a confused field. Based on this, this paper attempts to carve out the administrative omission and its judicial review system in the United States, decomposes the basic problems in the field of judicial review of omission, and briefly reviews the situation of judicial review in the United States in different periods. By analyzing the emergence of omission and the background of the court's reluctance to review, through the interpretation of typical cases, this paper analyzes the obstacles encountered by the court in the review of different types of administrative omission, and the corresponding review attitude and standards. It shows the strict attitude of the court towards different types of omission. Finally, with the renewal of the theory and practice of administrative law, the positive examination turn of administrative omission judicial review appears. The first part of this paper first introduces the changes in the field of judicial review in various administrative law periods in the United States, especially after the New deal, combing the period of traditional mode and the period of expert regulation. The focus areas of judicial review in American courts during the period of interest representation model and analysis management mode. The article also analyzes the influence and function of judicial activism and judicial restraint on the process of judicial review. The second part of this paper expounds the basic system of judicial review of administrative omission in the United States. This paper analyzes and compares the concept and definition of administrative omission in American law from the perspective of legal norms and hermeneutics, and expounds the social background of the emergence of administrative omission. On this basis, the second part introduces the provisions of administrative procedure law on judicial review of administrative omission. The third part of the article first combs the American law to the administrative behavior from the unexaminable to the reviewable attitude transformation, then elaborated the court to the administrative omission this special administrative act takes the conservative judicial attitude which is unwilling to examine. This attitude is mainly reflected in a classic Supreme Court case, Chaney. At the end of this part, the judgment of the case is interpreted critically. The fourth part, following the logic of the third part, analyzes why American courts are unwilling to review, explains the court's consideration from the theoretical and institutional levels, and emphasizes the plaintiff's qualification that the court pays attention to when reviewing the administrative omission. The final standard and the discretion standard are the core of this paper. The fifth part reorientates the angle of view to the Chaney case mentioned above. Through the limitation of the judgment in this case, it leads to another important field of administrative omission-the judicial review of the administrative omission. Different from the traditional judicial review attitude of the general administrative omission, the court takes a more lenient attitude towards the system omission. Finally, the article points out the positive turn of the attitude of judicial review of administrative omission in recent years, and the increasing demands of academic circles and courts themselves to change the negative attitude of judicial review of omission. Reflects the future period of time not as a judicial review system of a development trend and direction.
【学位授予单位】：浙江工商大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D925.3;D926

【参考文献】