行政合同的先合同义务研究

发布时间：2018-06-30 17:32

本文选题：行政合同 + 先合同义务　；参考：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：行政合同的先合同义务概念是基于行政合同的行政性和契约性而提出的。它所建构的逻辑起点是与行政性相对的正当程序原则和与契约性相对的诚实信用原则。正当程序原则所对应的是行政合同中的“隐形”主体缺位及行政合同相对人的权利保护缺失的问题，其目的在于弥补民事合同之诚实信用原则在行政合同缔结理论上的漏洞，与克服行政合同缔结实务中解决问题的困处。具体地说，行政合同之先合同义务包括两大方面：一是以正当程序原则为基点构建的先合同义务；二是以诚实信用原则为基点构建的先合同义务。对此，，通过行政法学原理及个案之应然需求的初步构绘，可知，前者应至少包括“拟订立行政合同的理由公开”、“选择合同相对方的要求公开”、“涉及公众相关利益的事项公开”等拟定事项公开义务，组织公众参与义务，协议草案公开义务，说明理由义务等内容；而后者则包括严格审查义务，充分协商义务，及时通知义务，合法竞争义务及忠诚保密义务等内容。而通过一些行政规范与行政合同案例的观察，不难发现先合同义务欠缺程序性保护与实体性保护。在程序性保护义务上主要存在的问题是：（1）合同义务受体尚不明确；（2）竞争与协商义务被忽视。在实体性保护义务上主要表现为：（1）行政规范对实体保护缺失；（2）行政机关对合同实体保护初现端倪但仍旧不足；（3）法院对合同实体保护的发展不够。对于现状，就行政合同先合同义务中的保护及先合同义务体系的发展，可从法院、规范制定主体及行政合同主体自身三方面演进。就法院而言，首先，它可在理性定位行政合同缔结过程的基础上通过个案发展先合同义务。理性定位要求在以人为本的基本指导思想的基础上宏观把握行政合同的缔结程序。在此基础上，可衍生出公益诉讼制度，和争议条款违法或无效制度。其次，法院可以在判决书中引入先合同义务的相关内容甚至直接显示，亦可通过司法建议提高行政主体处理先合同义务问题上的自觉性。在立法上，则表现为《行政程序法》中关于行政合同缔结程序的民主性参与的设计，以及地方立法主体在合同规范制定中的积极作为。而行政合同主体自身的要求主要表现在行政主体依法履行职责，合同相对人诚信缔约及“隐形”主体积极参与三个方面。当然，这几种演进模式必须联动起来，及时反映行政合同缔结程序中的实践问题，从而为先合同义务在行政合同域的发展提供更滋养的土壤。
[Abstract]:The concept of prior contract obligation of administrative contract is based on the administrative and contractual nature of administrative contract. Its logical starting point is the principle of due process relative to administration and the principle of good faith relative to contract. What the principle of due process corresponds to is the absence of the "invisible" subject in the administrative contract and the lack of protection of the rights of the counterpart of the administrative contract. The purpose of the principle is to make up for the loopholes in the theory of the conclusion of the administrative contract by the principle of good faith and credibility of the civil contract. To overcome the difficulties of solving problems in the practice of concluding administrative contracts. Specifically, the pre-contract obligation of administrative contract includes two aspects: one is based on the principle of due process, the other is based on the principle of good faith. In view of this, through the preliminary construction of the principle of administrative law and the need for the case, we can know that the former should include at least "the reasons for drawing up the administrative contract" and "the requirement of choosing the opposite party of the contract to be open". The obligation to make matters public, such as "disclosure of matters concerning public interests", the obligation to organize public participation, the obligation to make public the draft agreement, the obligation to explain the reasons, etc., while the latter includes the obligation to strictly examine and fully consult, Timely notification obligations, legal competition obligations and loyalty and confidentiality obligations and other content. Through the observation of some administrative norms and administrative contract cases, it is not difficult to find that the first contract obligation lacks procedural protection and substantive protection. The main problems in procedural obligation of protection are: (1) the receptor of contractual obligation is not clear; (2) the obligation of competition and negotiation is ignored. The main manifestations of the substantive protection obligations are: (1) the lack of substantive protection by administrative norms; (2) the initial appearance of the protection of contract entities by administrative organs but still insufficient; (3) the lack of development of the protection of contract entities by the courts. With regard to the present situation, the protection of the prior contract obligation of the administrative contract and the development of the system of the prior contractual obligation can evolve from three aspects: the court, the normative subject and the administrative contract subject itself. As far as the court is concerned, first of all, it can develop the pre-contract obligation by case on the basis of the rational orientation of the administrative contract conclusion process. Rational orientation requires holding the procedure of concluding administrative contract macroscopically on the basis of the basic guiding ideology of people-oriented. On this basis, we can derive the public interest litigation system, and dispute clause illegal or invalid system. Secondly, the court can introduce the relevant contents of the prior contract obligation into the judgment, and can also improve the consciousness of the administrative subject in dealing with the issue of the prior contract obligation through judicial advice. In legislation, it is manifested in the design of democratic participation in the procedure of concluding administrative contracts in the Administrative procedure Law and the positive action of the local legislative subjects in the formulation of contract norms. The main demands of the main body of the administrative contract are that the subject of the administrative contract performs its duties according to the law, that the contract counterpart signs the contract in good faith and that the subject takes an active part in the "invisible" subject. Of course, these evolution modes must be linked up to reflect the practical problems in the administrative contract conclusion process in time, thus providing a more nourishing soil for the development of the pre-contract obligation in the administrative contract domain.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.1

【参考文献】