作　　者： (闫尔宝）;

机构地区： 南开大学法学院,天津300350

出　　处： 《南京大学法律评论》 2017年第1期255-275,共21页

摘　　要： 行政诉讼类型法定化后,日本长期奉行抗告诉讼中心主义,当事人诉讼地位不彰。随着现代行政争议类型的多样化,以灵活解释“处分性”、扩张抗告诉讼对象范围救济国民权利的“处分性扩大论”牺牲了学理的自洽,造成了理论与制度实践之间关系的紧张。“当事人诉讼活用论”主张纯化行政处分概念,通过重新划定抗告诉讼与当事人诉讼的适用范围应对现代行政活动形式的多样化发展,并倡导在日本恢复实体公法观念。该理论既实现了充分保障国民权利的宪法要求,又兼顾了理论与制度实践的关联,因而获得了立法肯定。考察该理论的提出背景、学界争议以及立法肯定过程,对提升我国行政行为法研究水平、完善我国行政诉讼制度,具有重要参考意义。 After the Litigation of its Types of litigation, Centrism of Counterappeal Suithas been the center of Japan Administrative Litigationfor a long time, the Litigants Suitbecomes Negligible. While, faced with the diversity of types of modem administrative dispute, Centrism of Counter appeal Suit can not well response, the theory of Expanding on Dispositive that by flexible interpretation of ＂Regulation＂ to expand the range of counter appeal suit bring tensions between the theory and institution. On the other hand, theory of Flexible application of the Litigants Suit advocates to purifythe basic legal concepts, through the delimitation of the scope of Litigants Suit and Counterappeal Suit to adapt the modem administrative developments, and ultimately advocate to restore the concept of substantive public law. Now some of its Advocates have been Legislated. Introduce the theory Systematically is beneficial for the improvement of China＇s administrative act law research level and administrative litigation system.

关 键 词： 诉讼类型法定化 当事人诉讼活用论 抗告诉讼中心主义 处分性扩大论