政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/139607
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113311/144292 (79%)
造訪人次 : 50942191      線上人數 : 993
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139607


    題名: 從日本法論課予義務訴訟「依法申請」之制度內涵
    On the Meaning of Application Filed Under Laws in Mandatory Order from the Perspective of Japanese Law
    作者: 林孟楠
    貢獻者: 法學評論
    關鍵詞: 課予義務訴訟;依法申請;申請權;申請人;訴訟權能;程序權;實體權;無瑕疵裁量請求權;不作為;申請程序
    Mandatory Order;Application Filed Under Laws;The Right to Apply;Applicant;Standing;Procedural Right;Substantial Right;Right to Lawful Discretion;Inaction;Ex Officio Proceeding;Application Proceeding
    日期: 2021-03
    上傳時間: 2022-04-08 10:18:13 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 我國課予義務訴訟規定之「依法申請」，究竟具有何種制度內涵，至今未有明確一致之見解。鑑於日本法早於一九五○年代發展出「申請權」之概念，於行政事件訴訟法中規定「依法申請」，指引後續行政程序法及課予義務訴訟之立法方向。本文乃比較研究日本法，界定「依法申請」之制度內涵。基於日本法研究之成果，本文認為，行政處分申請人之法律地位可分為三層次，即程序開始請求權 ; 適法處分請求權及特定處分請求權。課予義務訴訟之「依法申請」，僅需申請人具有程序開始請求權及適法處分請求權。其後，探討「依法申請」與訴訟權能之關係，嘗試說明第三人依保護規範理論「促請」行政機關對他人作成不利益處分時，第三人仍應具有程序開始請求權及適法處分請求權，始符合「依法申請」之內涵。
    The meaning of an application filed under laws in mandatory order has not been specifically defined in Taiwan. However, it is clearly defined in Japan because the right to apply has been developed since 1950s and it has guided the legislation of administrative procedure act and mandatory order. This article analyzes the meaning of an application filed under laws in Japanese law and makes suggestions on how to define it in Taiwan. First, the paper proposes that the right to apply administrative decisions may be interpreted from three aspects: (1) the right to start a procedure, (2) the right to claim lawful decision-making, and (3) the right to claim a specific decision. Second, the meaning of an application filed under laws in mandatory order should include the first two aspects. Third, only when an individual who has the third party standing in addition to the right to start a procedure and the right to claim lawful decision-making may seek a mandatory order which requests an agency to make an adverse decision on specified persons.
    關聯: 法學評論, 164, 127-206
    資料類型: article
    DOI 連結: https://doi.org/10.3966/102398202021030164003
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202021030164003
    顯示於類別:[政大法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    30.pdf2139KbAdobe PDF2121檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋