Judicial Review of Abstract Administrative Acts

Gao Li

2010-01-01

Abstract:administrative acts can be effectively supervised in judicial review,which is an important means to avoid the damages caused by unlawful administrative acts.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

On Judicial Review of Abstract Administrative Act in China

HU Jin-guang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-6676.2006.02.016

2005-01-01

Abstract:In amending Administrative Procedure Law of the PRC,the previous stipulation that excludes abstract administrative act from the scope of judicial review should be modified,and abstract administrative act shall be put into the scope of administrative litigation. People's court shall enjoy the power of judicial review to part of administrative regulations and all abstract administrative acts. The plaintiff and the third party may request the court to review the legal validity of abstract administrative act in initiating the litigation as well as in the process of litigation. In examining abstract administrative act,the court shall observe the principles of legality review,incidental review and refused application.
Judicial Review System of the abstract administrative Act and Its Improvement In China

Wang Feng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-5973.2005.06.027

2005-01-01

Abstract:The abstract administrative act is an important method for the country to carry on the administration and the executive authority.Owing to the abstract administrative act's particularity,supervision must be strengthened.The judicial review system has more advantageous than other supervision systems for its fairness and justness.However,in China,the judicial review system only lies in the indirect inspection;in the direct inspection is the vacancy actually.The judicial review system should impress on the direct inspection to the abstract administrative act according to the experiences of the other countries.So,we should improve our judicial review system of the abstract administrative act fro m the aspects of the competent court,the proceeding and the ascertaining responsibility to the illegal abstract administrative act.
On Administrative Litigation's Performing Legal Duty Judgment

Zhang Jiansheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14111/j.cnki.zgfx.2011.01.012

2011-01-01

Abstract:"Non-performance"of"Administrative Procedure Law"Article 54,paragraph 3 means the executive authorities in a negative way without any intention,and"no answer";and"delayed discharge"is a situation that the statutory or administrative organ do not end the administrative procedures within a legal or reasonable period of time.In the way of judgment to perform statutory duty,the"Administrative Procedure Law"only contains"procedural judge"in content,however it based on philosophy of administrative relief for the administrative counterpart to provide economic,effective.When"the Administrative Procedure Law"is revised in the future,it should recognize the"substantive judgment"legitimacy of judgments to perform duties as an exemption."Administrative omission"does not of course violate administrative law;therefore it is different from"non - performance statutory duties."To the"refusal to perform"administrative act,the Court should annul and redo the judgment.In order to reduce the possible"tired litigation"of administrative counterpart, the court can add certain restrictive"instructions"for administrative organ in redo judgment.It is helpful that pay attention to the situations like"refusal to perform"for the Court to fulfill its statutory duty to judge correctly.
The Boundary of “Collecting Mistakes Whenever Discovered”

Zhang Jiansheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14111/j.cnki.zgfx.2013.02.010

2013-01-01

Abstract:Due to the joint efforts made by the scholars of administrative law over the past two decades,theoretical frame on determination of administrative decision and revocation of rules has become more mature. The contents of this theoretical frame is that if any mistakes is found in an administrative act that has been established, the administrative organ should follow relevant rescinding rules rather than the principle of "collecting mistakes whenever discovered". However, according to administrative judgments and official replies and answers issued by the Supreme People’s Court, it is clear that the Supreme People’s Court insisted on the principle of "collecting mistakes whenever discovered" rather than was influenced by the theoretical frame mentioned earlier. The Court does not alter its view until the case of Jiao Zhigang was published as a guiding case on the Supreme People’s Court Gazette. According to the judgment of the case of Jiao Zhigang, once an administrative act has been legally made and come into force, the administrative act cannot be withdrawn at will, it is binding not only on the affected person(s), but also on the administrative organ itself. However, the relevant judgments made by the courts at various levels show that the case of Jiao Zhigang has not been frequently referred to in the judgments, and the principle of "collecting mistakes whenever discovered" is still deeply rooted. It is possibly because the guiding cases are lacking in practical value and statutory tradition. However, the rules made in the case of Jiao Zhigang are still valuable, and its value has not only represented the impact of the theory on the decisions by the courts, but also acted as a sign of the development of the idea of rule of law.
The Present Situation of Abstract Administrative Action Supervision in Our country and the Construction of Judicial Review

LI Fei,CHEN Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1003-4730.2008.04.008

2008-01-01

Abstract:At present the review and supervision system of the abstract administrative action can not control the executive power fundamentally.The court has its unique superiority to the judicial review of the abstract administrative action;it balances all the related relations.Western countries have provided very good models.The construction of the judicial review of abstract administrative action must improve the judicial organ's status;achieve judicature's true independence from the constitutional government angle.Making the extent of authority and potency of the judicial review clear,consummating the jurisdiction,the prosecution and trial of the judicial review of abstract administrative action.
On "Refusal to Apply Rules" in Administrative Litigation:Based on the Analysis of No.5 Guiding Case Published by the Supreme People's Court

Zhang Jiansheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14167/j.zjss.2013.02.015

2013-01-01

Abstract:"Administrative Litigation Law" endows people's courts with judicial review of consulting rules when hearing administrative cases. The "refusal to apply rules" in No. 5 guiding case is regarded as the transformation from the doctrine of individual refusal to apply rules to that of universal refusal. That is to say, courts have been authorized to declare rules void. In other words, the case expended the judicial review. According to the hierarchy of legal force established by "Legislation Law", courts should determine first whether the law of lower level contradicts the law of higher level before refusing to apply rules. The standards to determine contradiction are as follows. In the relationship between rights and obligations, contradiction occurs when rights laid down in the law of higher level are restricted or deprived by the law of lower level, and when obligations laid down in the law of higher level are expanded or added by the law of lower level. In the relationship between powers and duties, contradiction occurs when powers laid down in the law of higher level are expanded or added by the law of lower level, and when duties laid down in the law of higher level are exempted by the law of lower level.
Solution of Disputes and Supervision of Powers: Dispute Solution in Laws Applying to Actions Against Administrative Agencies' Decisions

Hong-dao QIAN,Liang WU

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-2397.2008.05.001

2008-01-01

Abstract:Dispute solution is a legislative value transformed from civil litigation into the laws applying to actions against administrative agencies’ decisions, which aims at increasing the ability to solve disputes through actions against administration. However, actions from executive decisions have their own unique nature that may intensify the relationship with supervision of power, another feature inherent in the actions from administrative decisions. By way of easing the tension between dispute solution and power supervision, we can see how far the laws can go in performing the function of dispute solution and can demarcate the legitimacy of the compromise in the actions from administrative decisions so as to further ensure the protection of civil rights.
Set Up the Judicial Reviewing System of Our Country to the Abstract Administrative Activity

Yi Bin

2006-01-01

Abstract:With the demand of governmental administration at all levels in our country, the quantity of administration activity increase rapidly. However, the abstract administrative activity which breaks the law is increasingly seriously because the systems of none litigation supervise hardly carry out its functions at present. In order to push forward the progress of managing state affairs in accordance with the law, defend the legal rights of the citizen and bring the abstract administrative activity into the scope of accepting cases about administrative litigation, it is an irresistible trend to carry on judicial reviewing. So it has been an urgent thing to set up the judicial reviewing system of the abstract administrative activity with the Chinese characteristics.
Judicial Review on Abuse of Power by Administrative Authority

Lingyun Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11463-009-0004-5

2009-01-01

Frontiers of Law in China

Abstract:Through the analysis on three typical cases, it is believed why courts rarely make judgments directly based on the review criteria of “abuse of power” pursuant to article 54 of the Administrative Litigation Law is mostly that the relevant legal provisions are not clear. Besides, in hearings, judges are more inclined to use “conversion techniques”. Meanwhile, it is further revealed of the issues existing in the substantive review of courts.
Judicial Review of Evident Injustice of Administrative Act

Kong Fanhua

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-6285.2006.05.026

2006-01-01

Abstract:Justice is different from fairness and equality,and only exceedingly heavy or light administrative act is evident injustice.Because of its serious injustice,the evident injustice act is illicit.The judge has the right to review all evident injustice act,then makes judgement of alternation,repeal or confirmation according to different situations.
Research on Judicial Review of Manifestly Improper Administrative Acts

HongYu Lea

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22158/elp.v7n1p68

2024-05-27

Economics Law and Policy

Abstract:Judicial review, as a form of external supervision, can effectively improve the lack of self-supervision by administrative subjects. Obviously improper as one of the circumstances of administrative behavior, the definition of the academic community, and the “Administrative Procedure Law” and its judicial interpretation of the lack of clear definitions and application standards, resulting in the court in the judicial practice of the application of “obviously improper” as the basis for review of the standard is not uniform and inconsistent application of the problem, judges and Relying on their accumulated professional knowledge and practical experience to determine whether the administrative subject of the administrative act constitutes “obviously improper”, with a greater subjectivity, which may lead to administrative action as well as the judicial trial of the phenomenon of the same case, undermining the impartiality and authority of the judiciary, not conducive to the construction of the rule of law, the rule of law government. Therefore, in order to solve the above problems, the need for the meaning of clearly improper and its judgment standards, standardize the “clearly improper” the scope of application of the basis for review, the establishment of a unified standard of judicial review, but also to continue to improve the administrative case guidance system. Therefore, clarifying its criteria is of great significance to the people’s courts in correctly adjudicating administrative cases to safeguard the lawful rights and interests of citizens and legal persons, and also helps to standardize the criteria for judicial review, and to regulate and limit administrative power.

Law
On Judicial Governance of Administrative Discretion

GU Dasong,ZHOU Youyong

2012-01-01

Abstract:Under the functionalist building mode,the judicial review of administrative discretion should transfer emphasis from control to governance.Although the field of judicial review of administrative discretion,the court adopted the administrative rules with respect,but has not achieved the standard of judicial review of the conversion to the principles of administrative law,so need to follow the logic of the legal system development,and promote the process from rules to principles.Supreme Court through a typical case of Abstraction,in large part to promote the standard of judicial review of administrative discretion of the principle.
Analysis of the Judicial Review of Administrative Guidance

WU Wei-jun,TANG Xiang-yan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14071/j.1008-81052013.04.012

2013-01-01

Abstract:As a new and flexible means of administrative management,administrative guidance has been widely used in the administrative field.The judicial review of administrative guidance is not only the inevitable requirement of no abuse of power,but also the needs of the trust protection doctrine and the principle of rights relief.In the current legislation in China,suability of administrative guidance is still controversial,and the standards and rules of judicial review of administrative guidance is lacked as well.Therefore,we should start from the measures like expanding the scope of administrative litigation,enriching the substantive legislative of administrative guidance,and reforming the administrative litigation procedure to improve the design of the system of judicial review of administrative guidance.
Facts Judgment and Law Judgment in Administrative Litigation

WANG Kai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1005-0078.2007.01.016

2007-01-01

Administrative law review

Abstract:The structure of administrative litigation is different from that of criminal litigation and civil litigation. The fundamental value of administrative litigation is not only to protect human rights, but also to keep the separation of powers. That is to say, on the one hand, administrative litigation focuses on the judicial control on the executive power. One the other hand, it prevents the judicial power from trespassing the executive power. In conclusion, it is the problem of the intensity of judicial review. Administrative litigation law should attach importance to the difference of fact issue and law issue, and correspondingly establish a system placing different intensity of judicial review according to different issues.
Law Control on the Administrative Free Judgment

Yongsheng Zhang

2006-01-01

Abstract:The abuse in Free administrative judgment has been a critical problem now China faces in the legal system. The research on the administrative free judgment is only limited within the interior supervision and remedy after action, which lead to being unable to control the abuse in the administrative free judgment. Therefore, it is a must choice for us to strengthen the control on the administrative free judgment.
Judicial Control of Administrative Discretionary Power

Jiacheng Xu

2011-01-01

Abstract:Administrative discretionary power is an important symbol of the contemporary administrative law development.It plays an active role,and it is easily abused for invading the private party's legal rights and affecting the implementation of government functions.So administrative discretionary power should be regulated and controlled.The relation between judicial power and administrative power and the judicial objectivity all decided that judicial control was not only feasible but also effective.In order to prevent judicial power against administrative power,the judicial control must be limited.The limit is different when people's courts make legal examination or reasonable review in the judicial review of administrative discretionary behavior,which means the limit of legal examination,should be strengthened,while the reasonable review must be limited by the un-reasonable that is extent to the abuse of administrative discretionary power.
On Ultra Vires in Administrative Regulations

Zhang Shufang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.2095-3275.2012.02.005

2012-01-01

Abstract:Ultra vires in Administrative Regulations is one of the major problems in the administrative lawmaking in China,which lies in the Ultra vires of procedural competence and substantive competence,and the former is often controlled by the procedural institutions in the administrative law.The Ultra vires in substantive rules is complicated,which includes Ultra vires of public powers,administrative powers,localized powers,functional competence and hierarchical powers,all of which are out of control under any effective means for the time being.As a result,the principle of nullification of Ultra vires of Abstract administrative actions,the legal organs for the challenge of the private rights against public powers,the institution of recording and review on the substantive elements for administrative regulation and the rules to bring administrative regulation under the judicial review shall be founded in the system of administrative law.
On the Excess of Power of Abstract Administrative Act

Zhang Shu-fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-5205.2006.06.014

2006-01-01

Abstract:The excess of power of abstract administrative act is one kind of excess of power that oversteps the administrative power, jurisdiction, procedural power, right of administrative prohibiting institution and takes place in the course of administrative subject's administration. The excess of power of abstract administrative act should be investigated and the legal responsibility should be fixed.
The Essential Constituents of a Lawful Administrative Action

He Haibo

2009-01-01

Abstract:Grounds of judicial review in China mean essential constituents of a lawful administrative action.The grounds of judicial review can be logically distinguished by several reviewing elements and their reviewing standards respectively.The reviewing elements may be generalized as:(1)qualification and jurisdiction of the instant public authority;(2)legal conditions for a public authority to make disposition;(3)evidences to establish such legal conditions;(4)disposition of the instant case;(5)legal procedure with which the disposition has been made.The reviewing standards roughly contain three levels:legality(consistency with provisions of laws,regulations and rules),reasonability(following principles with regard to administrative discretion)and constitutionality.The author suggests that the grounds of judicial review stipulated in the Administrative Litigation Law 1989 be reconstructed accordingly.
On the Abiding Force of Administrative Action on Civil Adjudication

He Haibo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1003-1707.2008.02.008

2008-01-01

Abstract:Should an administrative decision have binding effects on a relevant private-parties dispute under civil proceeding,i.e.,should the court pass its own judgment on the dispute or give deference to the administrative action or suspend the civil proceeding and wait for the result of administrative litigation? This article,through comparing the common law traditions and continental law traditions in their ways and observing China's practices which have shown its own path,seeks a comprehensive solution in the Chinese context.It emphasizes that the autonomy of the judiciary in tackling the case in hand should be respected and that the binding effects of administrative action on civil proceeding should be largely limited.

Judicial Review of Abstract Administrative Acts

On Judicial Review of Abstract Administrative Act in China

Judicial Review System of the abstract administrative Act and Its Improvement In China

On Administrative Litigation's Performing Legal Duty Judgment

The Boundary of “Collecting Mistakes Whenever Discovered”

The Present Situation of Abstract Administrative Action Supervision in Our country and the Construction of Judicial Review

On "Refusal to Apply Rules" in Administrative Litigation:Based on the Analysis of No.5 Guiding Case Published by the Supreme People's Court

Solution of Disputes and Supervision of Powers: Dispute Solution in Laws Applying to Actions Against Administrative Agencies' Decisions

Set Up the Judicial Reviewing System of Our Country to the Abstract Administrative Activity

Judicial Review on Abuse of Power by Administrative Authority

Judicial Review of Evident Injustice of Administrative Act

Research on Judicial Review of Manifestly Improper Administrative Acts

On Judicial Governance of Administrative Discretion

Analysis of the Judicial Review of Administrative Guidance

Facts Judgment and Law Judgment in Administrative Litigation

Law Control on the Administrative Free Judgment

Judicial Control of Administrative Discretionary Power

On Ultra Vires in Administrative Regulations

On the Excess of Power of Abstract Administrative Act

The Essential Constituents of a Lawful Administrative Action

On the Abiding Force of Administrative Action on Civil Adjudication