法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 論行政機關對於嗣後違法行政處分之處置(Responses to Ex Post Facto Illegality of Administrative Disposition)
編著譯者: 陳信安
出版日期: 2017.10
刊登出處: 台灣/東吳法律學報第 29 卷 第 2 期 /71-116 頁
頁  數: 46 點閱次數: 1193
下載點數: 184 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 東吳大學 授權者指定不分配權利金給作者)
關 鍵 詞: 行政處分之廢棄撤銷廢止嗣後違法
中文摘要: 依現今學理通說,行政處分之合法性係以處分作成之時為判斷基準時點。基此,行政處分若於作成之時即已違法,原處分機關即得依行政程序法第 117 條以下關於撤銷之規定處理;反之,若行政處分於作成之時係屬合法,但因嗣後事實或法律變更而質變為違法,則處分機關應依行政程序法第 122 條或第 123 條第 4 款規定處理。此等二分法乍看之下,似無疑問。然若行政處分就其規制效力以觀,係非屬一次性,而係所謂具持續效力之行政處分時,則前述行政程序法第 122 條、第 123 條第 4 款,以及第 125 條等規定所建構之廢止機制內,恐無法處理基於該等行政處分所提供之相關給付應如何請求返還之問題。對此,本文將先行探究我國行政程序法 117 條以下關於行政處分廢棄機制之規範內容,以及分析相關學理及實務見解,繼之並探究德國聯邦行政程序法於 1996 年修法前、後之規範內容,借鏡德國行政法學理及實務之論證,從中探求可作為我國行政機關處理前述問題時之可行方式,並嘗試提出修法之建議。
英文關鍵詞: Administrative Procedure ActAdministrative Dispositionwithdrawalrevocation
英文摘要: In general, the theoretical setting of legality of administrative disposition is determined by the time point at which the disposition is taken. Accordingly, if specific administrative disposition is illegal at the time of the deed, the agency or institution pursuing the disposition shall proceed to withdrawal of the disposition pursuant to the rear section of Article 117 of the Administrative Procedure Act. In contrast, if specific administrative disposition is legal at the time of the deed but turns illegal ex post facto due to the evolution of the event in point or the change in the legal environment, the agency/institution pursuing the disposition shall proceed to Article 122 or Article 123, paragraph 4 of the Administrative Procedure Act. The dualistic view of the same administrative disposition appears to be unquestionable. However, if the effect of administrative disposition is not a one time deal and should entail sustainable effect, the mechanism of revocation provided by Article 122, Article 123, paragraph 4, and Article 125 of the Administrative Procedure Act may not be able to provide for the request for return of related payment. In this paper, the content covering the mechanism of withdrawal of administrative disposition provided by Article 117 of the Administrative Procedure Act in Taiwan will be addressed. Related academic theories and insights from practices will also be subject to analysis. In addition, the Federal Administrative Procedure Act of Germany before and after the amendment in 1996 will also be explored. The theories and practices of administrative law in Germany will be studied and taken as an example of case study to explore the feasible solutions for the administrative agencies or institutions in handling the aforementioned issue with an attempt to present recommendation for amending the law.
目  次: 壹、前言-由二則案例談起
貳、我國學理及實務見解概述
  一、學理見解分析
  二、實務見解
  (一)法務部函釋
  (二)行政法院裁判
  (三)小結
參、德國法制之借鏡
  一、1996 年聯邦行政程序法修法前
  (一)1977 年版德國聯邦行政程序法廢棄規定之概述
  (二)德國學理見解分析
  二、1996 年聯邦行政程序法修法後
  (一)修法概述
  (二)學理見解
  (三)行政法院見解
肆、本文見解
伍、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
返回功能列