機關間行政行為效力之研究 —以多階段行政處分為中心

Abstract

本文聚焦於多階段行政處分之研究，分別就其定義、定性、類型化及行政爭訟途徑為分析。首先，按行政程序法第140條第2項規定及學說見解之爬梳歸納可知，多階段行政處分之核心在於其他行政機關依法參與處分作成程序。是以，多階段行政處分之定義為：依法須經其他行為機關之參與，始得作成之行政處分。 再者，以法定參與行為所具有之拘束力為判斷標準，得將多階段行政處分區分為「法律上拘束力型」及「事實上拘束力型」，前者為參與行為對終局處分具有法律上拘束力，在滿足對外性要件之前提下，屬行政處分，例外肯認其單獨爭訟之容許性；後者則指參與行為對終局處分僅具事實上拘束力，即便對外使相對人知悉參與決定，亦因未直接發生法律效果而非行政處分，則僅得於終局處分爭訟程序中，由受理訴願機關及行政法院一併就參與行為之適當性或適法性為審查。 最後，非行政處分之參與行為亦可能間接導致相對人權益侵害，例如，前階段機關消極不作為或為內部否准，導致整體程序中斷，後階段機關因此不作成終局處分，又如，後階段機關根據前階段機關之參與決定，作成不利於相對人之終局處分。從而，在對終局處分之爭訟程序中，行政法院之審查範圍及於前階段機關之參與決定，前階段機關應為行政訴訟法第42條所定之利害關係人之獨立參加，屬受判決效力主觀範圍所及之訴訟當事人。此外，相對人得請求確認參與決定違法或命前階段機關作成有利於己之決定，則判決效力客觀範圍將及於前階段機關之參與決定，始能充分保障相對人之權益，俾使紛爭一次解決及防免裁判矛盾。

This thesis focuses on multi-stage administrative disposition, especially the definition, types, characterization, and administrative remedy process. First of all, in compliance with article 140 (2) of Administrative Procedure Act and analysis of scholars' opinions, the definition of multi-stage administrative disposition is: the administrative disposition that needs other administrations providing assistance in accordance with law. Secondly, because the key concept of multi-stage administrative disposition is engagement by other administrations in accordance with law, multi-stage administrative disposition can be typed as legally-binding type and non-legally-binding type. In legally-binding type, the administrative decision made by former-stage administration has legally binding to latter-stage administration so it can be characterized as administrative disposition if it is made to the party concerned. In addition, the party concerned can sue the former-stage administration directly. On the contrary, in non-legally-binding type, the administrative decision made by former-stage administration only has non-legally binding to latter-stage administration so it cannot be characterized as administrative disposition although it is made to the party concerned. Besides, the party concerned can only sue the latter-stage administration but meanwhile Petitions Reviewing Commission and Administrative Court have power to review former-stage administrative decision. Lastly, in non-legally-binding type, when Administrative Court reviewing former-stage administrative decision, in order to protect the rights of the party concerned adequately, this thesis suggests that: (1) former-stage administration should entry into this litigation as a third party, in compliance with article 42 of Administrative Litigation Act; (2) because of (1), the party concerned can claim for a judgment to confirm that former-stage administrative decision is illegal or to demand that former-stage administration render an administrative disposition with certain content.