透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.118.200.136
  • 學位論文

由權力分立觀點論行政裁量類型化之司法審查

Categorization of Judicial Review on Administrative Discretion : An Analysis from Viewpoints of the Separation of Powers

指導教授 : 李建良
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


現今行政行為所涉及之面向日益趨廣,此時由於所牽涉之利害關係人增多,處理之案件自多有涉及人民相互間權利之拉鋸。此外,由於近代公共事務之內容趨向多元複雜,行政權得以形塑之範圍也大增。傳統對行政裁量之司法審查方式是否適宜就此些不同情況造成行政裁量之不同形態,及其所涉之不同問題為考慮審酌,乃待解之題。   由於現代行政事件類型所考量之因素較傳統繁多,相應於此,對其所為之司法審查自應再分類歸納而尋求適切的同與異之劃分。故本文擬對於現代行政事件下之行政裁量,提出有必要類型化其司法審查之建議。是以,本文即藉由重新檢視行政裁量所涉權力分力問題之途徑,希冀在現代行政事件中,找出對於司法審查方式最適切之建議,以求能有效制衡行政權之行使。   於確立行政裁量之司法審查有類型化之必要及其各自不同之考量要素後,本文嘗試對行政裁量類型化之司法審查提出建議,並分別對個案裁量及一般裁量之司法審查嘗試作出建議。接著本文另從行政裁量與不確定法律概念之近似性著眼,討論不確定法律概念具體化之司法審查以案件類型作為審查密度決定之方式,是否可供行政裁量之司法審查借鏡。此外,基於行政裁量之特殊性,造成其與定暫時狀態處分內容之限制,即禁止超越本案裁判之要求相衝突。其雖非本論文主要部分,然仍有關聯,故亦於此脈絡內討論之(附論)。

並列摘要


Current level of administrative acts involve more extensively than before that handling cases are more likely to relate to reconciles of civil rights due to increasing of stakeholders concerned. In addition, modern public affairs are more complicated that the scope of executive power enlarges intensively. It’s still questionable whether traditional judicial reviews toward administrative discretion are proper to deal with different situations caused by varied conditions and referred issues.   As the factors of modern administrative case concerned are more than before, judicial reviews on this need to be resorted for appropriate classification correspondingly. This thesis suggests the necessity of categorizing judicial reviews on administrative discretion under modern administrative case. Meanwhile, through reviewing the separation of powers that administrative discretion involved, this thesis directs to sort out appropriate recommendations for judicial review from modern administrative discretion, accomplishing the purpose of checks and balances of executive power effective.   While varifying the necessity to categorize judicial reviews of administrative discretion as well as repective elements from different considerations, this thesis attempts to make suggestions toward judicial reviews of categozied adminstrative discretion. Following that, it studies the similarity between administrative discretion and indefinite concept of law. Judicial reviews of indefinite concept of law— the way to decide the density of reviews on types of cases, whether it can be used as reference. Furthermore, concerning the particularity of administrative discretion, it results in its conflict restriction of injunctive relief, prohibiting judges beyond the requirements of the case. Though it’s not the main topic in the thesis yet still related, it’s discussed in context.

參考文獻


1、吳信華,憲法審判機關與立法者,東吳法律學報第20卷第4期,2009年4月,頁53-87。
14、翁岳生,論法官之法規審查權,台灣大學法學論叢第24卷第2期,1995年6月,頁87-109。
16、張志偉,論民主原則之圖像—以德國與美國法之民主正當性傳遞模式為借鏡,國立中正大學法學集刊第22期,2007年05月,頁165-219。
19、陳英鈐,從有效權利保護論公法上假處分—與最高行政法院的裁定對話,台灣大學法學論叢第34卷第4期,2005年7月,頁71-128。
22、黃昭元,司法違憲審查的正當性爭議—理論基礎與方法論的初步檢討,台灣大學法學論叢第32卷第6期,2003年11月,頁103-151。

被引用紀錄


蕭宇君(2012)。環境影響評估的司法審查:審查密度與判斷標準〔碩士論文,國立清華大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6843/NTHU.2012.00430
林靜瑜(2014)。環境罰鍰裁量基準之研究—兼論不法利得之追繳〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2014.10130

延伸閱讀