规范性文件的合法性要件——首例附带性司法审查判决书评析
发布时间：2018-09-03 10:15
【摘要】：北京知识产权法院作出的首例对规范性文件附带审查的判决,将审查对象限定于规范性文件特定部分,第一次提出合法性构成要件为主体、权限、内容和程序四项,但只审查其中构成争议的要件;对于常识性的法律概念,在对其"具体应用"解释设定了新的权利义务或违反了法律原则时,就构成"不合法"。该判决书对法律的理解,使相关条文内容具体化,同时也为同类案件的审查提供了具有一定判例属性的方向。此外,该判决也对规范性文件的司法审查在诉讼程序方面的事项,提出了如是否文面审查和是否单独审查等一系列值得深入思考的问题。
[Abstract]:The first judgment made by the Beijing intellectual property Court on the incidental examination of normative documents limited the object of examination to specific parts of normative documents. For the first time, it proposed that the constituent elements of legality should be the subject, the authority, the content and the procedure. However, only the elements which constitute a dispute are examined; for common-sense legal concepts, it constitutes "illegality" when new rights and obligations are created for its "specific application" interpretation or when it violates the principle of law. The understanding of the law in the judgment makes the contents of the relevant articles concrete, and it also provides a certain direction of precedent for the examination of similar cases. In addition, the judgment also puts forward a series of issues worth considering deeply, such as whether to examine the text and whether to examine separately, for the judicial review of the normative documents in the aspect of litigation procedure.
【作者单位】： 上海交通大学凯原法学院;
【分类号】：D926.2;D925.3
，
本文编号：2219682
[Abstract]:The first judgment made by the Beijing intellectual property Court on the incidental examination of normative documents limited the object of examination to specific parts of normative documents. For the first time, it proposed that the constituent elements of legality should be the subject, the authority, the content and the procedure. However, only the elements which constitute a dispute are examined; for common-sense legal concepts, it constitutes "illegality" when new rights and obligations are created for its "specific application" interpretation or when it violates the principle of law. The understanding of the law in the judgment makes the contents of the relevant articles concrete, and it also provides a certain direction of precedent for the examination of similar cases. In addition, the judgment also puts forward a series of issues worth considering deeply, such as whether to examine the text and whether to examine separately, for the judicial review of the normative documents in the aspect of litigation procedure.
【作者单位】： 上海交通大学凯原法学院;
【分类号】：D926.2;D925.3
，
本文编号：2219682
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2219682.html
