论文部分内容阅读
自《行政诉讼法》颁行以来,学界贯以“原告资格”来筛选原告,其核心观点为“利害关系人”是原告,在现有的行政诉讼制度下,这是一种以可得法院判决的标准来确定原告的含义;这一标准忽略了裁定也可以作为行政诉讼的终结裁判方式,造成实践中出现“没有原告资格原告”的尴尬局面;应回归程序法定位来认识原告,在立案登记制背景下,对于新修正的《行政诉讼法》第二十五条的“利害关系”应解释为控制是否可以进行完整诉讼程序的标准;滥诉不能作为限制诉权的借口,应该尽可能给予相对人完整的行政诉讼救济。
Since the Administrative Procedure Law was enacted, academics have been screening plaintiffs with “plaintiff qualification”. The core point of view is that the “interested parties” are the plaintiffs. Under the existing system of administrative litigation, this is a The criterion of the plaintiff can be determined by the standard of the court judgment which ignores the fact that the verdict can also be used as the method of final adjudication of administrative proceedings and causes the embarrassment of “plaintiff without plaintiff” in practice. To understand the plaintiffs, in the context of the case registration system, the “interest” of Article 25 of the newly amended Administrative Procedure Law should be interpreted as a standard to control whether a complete litigation process can be carried out; a case of abuse can not be restricted The pretext of the right to appeal, should be given as far as possible relative to the complete administrative litigation relief.