摘要
根据我国《行政诉讼法》第二十五条之规定,行政诉讼原告资格为行政行为相对人以及与行政行为有利害关系的公民、法人或者其他组织。由此可知,判断当事人是否具有行政诉讼原告资格就是判断其是否是与行政行为有关的“利害关系人”。至于如何认定“利害关系”,我国目前尚未形成统一判断路径,基于法律规范的模糊性,在认定原告资格时更依赖于法官主观心证,衍生出“实际影响论”“因果关系论”等相关判断路径。2017年最高院通过“刘广明案”引入保护规范理论,本文通过对该理论在我国适用现状进行分析,研究该理论在我国适用中出现的问题及成因,以期找到适合我国适用的保护规范理论论证逻辑。
According to Article 25 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People’s Republic of China, the plaintiff in an administrative lawsuit is qualified as the counterpart of the administrative act and the citizens, legal persons or other organizations that have an interest in the administrative act. It can be seen from this that to determine whether a party has the qualifications to be a plaintiff in an administrative lawsuit is to determine whether it is an “interested party” related to the administrative act. As for how to determine the “interest”, China has not yet formed a unified judgment path, and based on the ambiguity of legal norms, it relies more on the judge’s subjective evidence when determining the plaintiff’s qualification, and derives related judgment paths such as “actual impact theory” and “causality theory”. In 2017, the Supreme People’s Court introduced the theory of protection norms through the “Liu Guangming case”, and this paper analyzes the current situation of the application of the theory in China, and studies the problems and causes of the theory in China, in order to find a suitable logic for the argumentation of the theory of protection norms applicable in China.
出处
《法学（汉斯）》
2024年第2期1340-1346,共7页
Open Journal of Legal Science
