請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/71250
標題: | 論行政程序重新開始—以行政程序法第128條規範為核心 Study on re-opening admisnistrative procedures —focused on Administrative Procedure Act Art.128 |
作者: | Hsiao-Kang Ho 何効鋼 |
指導教授: | 林明昕(Ming-Hsin Lin) |
關鍵字: | 行政程序重新開始,行政程序法,行政處分,特殊權利保護制度,德國聯邦行政程序法,訴訟權,信賴保護, RE-OPENING OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES,WIEDERAUFGREIFEN,ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE LAW,ADMINISTRATIVE DISPOSITION,SPECIAL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS PROTECTING PROCEDURE,VERWALTUNGSVERFAHRENSGESETZ,RIGHT OF INSTITUTING LEGAL PROCEEDINGS,PRINCIPLE OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION, |
出版年 : | 2018 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 行政程序重新開始制度在行政程序法制定後,已經是我國法律所明文規範針對行政處分之特殊程序。但囿於學說上對於制度實際操作的討論有限,以及實務上對於行政程序重新開始制度的狹義理解,導致此一制度現實上適用之案例極少,甚至造成人民無意願嘗試申請的惡性循環。但本文認為程序重新開始制度作為特殊的權利保護制度,具有其獨特而無法取代的制度目的,也不應作如同現行實務操作如此狹義的解釋。
故本文試圖藉由探詢我國行政程序法制定之比較法典範,以及對照我國平行的訴訟法上的特殊權利保護機制,希望能將行政程序重新開始制度進行完整的程序運行的介紹,自程序的操作、要件乃至實際運作應遵循的法理及界線,作一次整體的檢驗。一方面檢討固有的實務見解是否妥適,同時引進比較法上的看法,做為我國制度發展的對照與參考,希望能藉由明確的整理及介紹,使實際操作制度之機關,能免除適用不明確制度之排斥感,使程序重新開始制度能真正在我國落地生根。 最終本文也就部分條文規範不清、錯誤及可能有牴觸憲法訴訟權保障疑義的部分,提出修正的建議,試圖就部分解釋論上難以完善解決的問題,能尋求將來在立法上解決的途徑。 Re-opening of administrative procedures (known as “Wiederaufgreifen”) is a special procedure for administrative disposition in Taiwanese Administrative Procedure Act. However, due to the lack of discussion of the detail of practice in this procedure, and the narrow understanding in the Judicial practice, “Wiederaufgreifen” has been only applied in little cases. This thesis argues that “Wiederaufgreifen” is a special procedure protecting individual rights, which cannot be substituted by other institution. Therefore, this study tries to compare the statue to the German Federal Administrative Procedure Act, which Taiwanese inherited lots from, and other individual rights protecting special procedure in Procedure Order, such as retrial procedure. In order to build a comprehensive picture of “Wiederaufgreifen”, including the different stair of procedure, the require, guide principle and boundaries of the procedure. On one hand to review the current judicial interpretationn of “Wiederaufgreifen”, and on the other hand introduce the comparative law view, to give the administrative agent inexperience in “Wiederaufgreifen” a clear introduction, and let the procedure of “Wiederaufgreifen” rooted in Taiwanese administrative practice. In conclusion, this study addressed a suggestion on amending the law, tries to solve the vague or error in the statue, and avoids the unconstitutional interfere of right of instituting legal proceedings. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/71250 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU201801964 |
全文授權: | 有償授權 |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-107-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.14 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。