Administrative litigation retrial reasons are the standards of review to start the retrial procedure. The maintenance to res judicata is the premise when the retrial reasons are stipulated. In the meantime, the following principles should be insisted on: more severe errors in the court referee, the clear expression of retrial reasons and the close scope of retrial reasons. Based on the above standard, this paper analyzes the new administrative procedure law from two aspects. Firstly, the retrial reasons are analyzed from the form. This paper points out that the inconsistency statements about the retrial reasons in the new administrative procedural law among three main subjects, the parties, the court, and the procuratorate, are harmful. Secondly, the content of retrial reasons of the new administrative litigation is analyzed, especially the following six retrial reasons. Namely, the retrial reason for ″refusing to register or rejecting pleadings because of the court’s fault″, the retrial reason for ″new evidence enough to overthrow the original judgment or written order″, the retrial reason for ″the main evidence for ascertaining the facts by the original judgment or written order is not sufficient and not cross-examined or falsified″, the retrial reason for ″the laws and regulations are mistakenly used in the original judgment or written order″, the retrial reason for ″the litigation procedure in violation of laws may affect a fair trial″, the retrial reason for conciliation statement. These reasons are too general and broad to accurately grasp in practice because of their lack of clarity, concreteness, and objectivity. As a result, the stability of legal relations affirmed by the court’s efficient decision and judgment will be threatened, and the res judicata of the court judge will be severely affected, and the seriousness and authority of law will be damaged in the end. And also, the system of two-tier appellate will be malfunctioned, and the limited judicial resources will be wasted, and the opposing party will be reduced to the endless litigation. On the basis of the above research and through absorbing and drawing lessons from foreign experience about the retrial reasons for administrative litigation and combining the characteristics of administrative litigation in China, this article puts forward the suggestions on the establishment of the retrial reasons for administrative litigation,as follows. In the premise of the stability of the new administrative procedure law, the explanatory amendment of the retrial reasons for new administrative procedure law should be done in order to eliminate the vagueness and uncertainty and to ensure that the retrial reasons be listed maneuverable and clearly, by way of judicial interpretation by the Supreme People’s Court. On the basis of the maintenance of the res judicata, the standards should be the seriousness about the mistakes in the referee documents, the clarity of the statement, the limited scope, and the uniformity among the parties, court, procuratorate. At present, the research on retrial reasons for the administrative procedure law is much less than that of civil suit retrial reasons, especially on the retrial reasons for the new administrative procedure law. Therefore, this in-depth research on the retrial reasons for that law boasts high theoretical value and practical importance.
王春业. 论行政诉讼的再审事由——评新行政诉讼法再审相关条款[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2018, 4(2): 87-97.
Wang Chunye. On the Retrial Reasons of Administrative Litigation: Comment on Relevant Provisions of New Administrative Procedure Law. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2018, 4(2): 87-97.
[1] 翁岳生:《行政法(下)》,北京:中国法制出版社,2009年. [Weng Yuesheng, The Administrative Law (Ⅱ), Beijing: China Legal System Publishing House, 2009.] [2] [日]兼子一、竹下守夫: 《民事诉讼法(新版)》,白绿铉译,北京:法律出版社,1995年. [Hajime Kaneko & Takeshita Morio, The Civil Procedure Law (New Edition), trans. by Bai Lüxuan, Beijing: Law Press,1995.] [3] 胡军辉:《论离婚判决的既判力及其程序保障》,《法学家》,2014年第3期, 第74-84页. [Hu Junhui,″ On the Res Judicata and Procedural Safeguards of Divorce Judgment,″The Jurist,No.3(2014), pp.74-84.] [4] 王亚新:《对抗与判定:日本民事诉讼的基本结构》,北京:清华大学出版社,2002年. [Wang Yaxin, Confrontation and Determination:The Basic Structure of Japan Civil Litigation,Beijing:Tsinghua University Press, 2002.] [5] 虞政平:《再审程序》, 北京:法律出版社,2007年. [Yu Zhengping, Retrial Procedure, Beijing: Law Press, 2007.] [6] 姜明安:《行政诉讼功能和作用的再审视》,《求是学刊》,2011年第1期, 第81-88页. [Jiang Ming’an, ″A Re-examination to the Function and Role of the Administrative Litigation,″Seeking Truth,No.1(2011), pp.81-88.] [7] 沈福俊:《基层法院行政诉讼管辖制度改革论析——<行政诉讼法修正案(草案)>相关内容分析》,《东方法学》,2014年第2期, 第59-69页. [Shen Fujun,″ On the Reform of the Grass-roots Court Jurisdiction of Administrative Litigation System: The Related Content Analysis on Amendment (Draft) of the Administrative Procedure Law,″Oriental Law,No.2(2014), pp.59-69.] [8] [日]新堂幸司: 《新民事诉讼法》,林剑锋译,北京:法律出版社,2008年. [Taniguchi Yasuhe, The New Civil Procedure Law, trans. by Lin Jianfeng, Beijing: Law Press, 2008.] [9] [日]谷口安平: 《程序正义与诉讼》,王亚新、刘荣军译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996年. [Taniguchi Yasuhe, Procedural Justice and Litigation, trans. by Wang Yaxin & Liu Rongjun, Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law Press, 1996.] [10] 张卫平:《再审事由规范的再调整》,《中国法学》,2011年第3期, 第62-70页. [Zhang Weiping,″ The Readjustment of the Retrial Reason Code,″China Legal Science,No.3(2011), pp.62-70.] [11] [德]罗森贝克、施瓦布、戈特瓦尔德: 《德国民事诉讼法(下)》,李大雪译,北京:中国法制出版社2007年. [Rosenberg L., Schwab G.& Gottwald P.,The Civil Procedure Law in Germany (Ⅱ),trans. by Li Daxue, Beijing: China Legal System Publishing House, 2007.] [12] 江伟、崔蕴涛: 《程序救济与再审事由设置》,《江淮论坛》,2011年第1期, 第86-89页. [Jiang Wei & Cui Yuntao,″ On the Settings of Procedure Relief and Retrial Reason,″Jiang-huai Tribune,No.1(2011), pp.86-89.] [13] 张卫平:《再审事由构成再探讨》,《法学家》,2007年第6期, 第13-18页. [Zhang Weiping,″ Reexamination to Element of Retrial Reason,″Jurists Review,No.6(2007), pp.13-18.] [14] 张卫平:《民事再审事由研究》,《法学研究》,2000年第5期, 第102-113页. [Zhang Weiping,″ The Research of Civil Retrial Reason ,″Cass Journal of Law,No.5(2000), pp.102-113.] [15] 孙祥壮:《再审事由之“原判决、裁定认定的基本事实缺乏证据证明”的初步解读》,《法律适用》,2009年第9期, 第29-33页. [Sun Xiangzhuang,″ The Preliminary Interpretation on Retrial Reason of 'the Basic Facts Affirmed by the Original Judgment or Ruling Lack of Evidence',″Journal of Law Application,No.9(2009), pp.29-33.] [16] 虞政平:《再审程序有限性的思考》,《人民法院报》2001年9月20日,第3版. [Yu Zhengping,″ The Thinking on the Finiteness of Retrial Procedure,″ People’s Court Daily, 2001-09-20, p.3.] [17] 张树义:《寻求行政诉讼制度发展的良性循环》,北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000年. [Zhang Shuyi, Seeking a Virtuous Cycle on the Development of the Administrative Litigation System, Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law Press, 2000.] [18] 甘文:《行政诉讼法司法解释之评论——理由、观点与问题》,北京:中国法制出版社,2000年. [Gan Wen, Review on the Judicial Interpretation of the Administrative Procedure Law:Reason,Opinions and Problems, Beijing:China Legal System Publishing House, 2000.]