Study On The Limitation Of Actions Of The Administrative Litigation System

This doctoral dissertation sets out to study the methodology of the complete construction of China’s limitation of action in administrative litigation system and improvement of the prosecution deadline system, under the light of litigation types perspective, with many methods are applied, such as concept definition, historical analysis, value analysis, normative analysis and comparative research. Besides the parts of introduction and conclusion, the dissertation includes four sections,15chapters, about200,000words altogether. The following parts briefly describe the basic ideas, viewpoints, and content of the thesis.The introduction part gives an analysis of the research background, significance, status, ideas, methods and the main points of the dissertation.The first chapter would explore the concept definition of the prosecution deadline in administrative litigation, including its discussion of the connotation, denotation, properties and characteristics, the relationships among the prosecution deadline of the administrative litigation, the scope of accepting cases, invalid administrative act, administrative reconsideration, power failure, administrative compulsory execution and petition letter, etc, also the effectiveness and functions of prosecution deadline of the administrative litigation. In the dissertation, by analyzing and studying the core theory of the administrative law, the history of the theory of administrative effectiveness and the formation of the system of prosecution deadline, the dissertation intends to define the prosecution deadline as the following words:The administrative litigation prosecution deadline means the time limit of exercising the administrative revocation right when the legal party involved is not satisfied with the administrative decision and appeal to the court for judicial remedies. The definition of the prosecution deadline is given according to the limitation of civil law and the appellate period of the procedural law. Prosecution deadline also referred as the scheduled period of the administrative law, in nature, is a period of time which is guaranteed by the law, where any interruption and suspension of it shall not be allowed, and compensation of time lost in unexpected delay and extension can only be allowed under certain specific conditions. Based on the narrowly defined prosecution deadline, the dissertation will justify the current situation of Chinese legislative and judicial practice, where the regulation designing is limited to withdrawal, by analyzing the phenomenon that the prosecution deadline can be applied to all administrative cases, and by discussing the proposal of the majority scholars to change the prosecution deadline to be something like the statute of limitations in the civil procedure law, so as to point out the drawbacks of the designing of the above mentioned unitary limitation rules, and demonstrates the main idea of "pluralism" in designing the prosecution deadline of the administrative litigation provisions in China, in other words, the setting and suitable range of application of the prosecution deadline in administrative litigation cases shall be "limited".The second chapter will study the Setting of the Prosecution Deadline. In China, only one statute of limitation (prosecution deadline) has been held in the current Administrative litigation Law and its judicial interpretation. In judicial practices, the very same time limit for prosecution is aimed to be applied to all kinds of administrative acts and controversies. Ignoring their diversities has led to many negative cases in which the legitimate right and interests of the parties are failed to be safeguarded, quite severely arousing criticism from scholars. In this chapter, by using the foreign experience as reference, the author clarifies the historical development and the theoretical foundation of different types of limitation rules based on a new perspective of the classification of prosecution. Besides, the author will define the position and function of each limitation rule in solving the administrative controversies in real situation. The dissertation focuses on the relevance between limitation period and type of prosecution, and the range of the prosecution deadline. Meanwhile, the paper discusses the current academic viewpoints on revising the limitation rules of Administrative litigation Law of china and puts forth several advices on the establishment of limitation rules in accordance with different prosecution types and the improvement of administrative compensation procedure and limitation rules.It focus on the relevance between prosecution deadline and litigation type and setting range of prosecution deadline. It analysizes the current academic viewpoints on revising limitation rules in China’s Administrative Litigation Law and on that basis the author offer some proposals on limitation rules of different litigation types and perfecting administrative compensation procedure and limitation rules. The author propose that by using extraterritorial experience for reference that China can maintain the existing prosecution deadline in administrative repeal lawsuit, introduce extinctive prescription into administrative granting lawsuit, introduce the invalidation of right rules into administrative confirmation lawsuit and solve the problem of what limitation rules should be applied to prevent the phenomena of indiscriminate lawsuits and undying importunate lawsuits when some administrative cases can’t be applied to the rules of prosecution deadline. In short, the main idea of this chapter is that under the background of typed litigation, the whole limitation rules in China’s administrative litigation should be diversified designed according to the differences of litigation types and setting range of prosecution deadline should be limited, which means prosecution deadline is only applied to specific litigation types such as repeal lawsuit and the types directly connected to the abolition of validity of administrative act.The three chapter would discuss the Application of Prosecution Deadline. The main idea is to offer reasonable proposals on perfecting specific rules in connection with type setting of prosecution deadline, teaching obligations of administrative bodies, prosecution deadline’s deduction, restitutio in integrum and extension, the other judicial remedy ways after prosecution deadline expires and so on. Many articles criticizing that the setting of short-term prosecution deadline in China is not reasonable have ignored an important question, namely this chapter’s discussion is focused on the setting rule problem——the connection between administrative subjects’teaching obligation of remedy deadline and optional application to the types of prosecution deadline, which can embody the designing characteristic of administrative repeal lawsuit’s prosecution deadline system most. This paper has fully demonstrated the necessity and possibility in setting teaching obligations of administrative subjects in national legislation, and offered specific proposals on perfecting rules to strengthen the legitimacy and rationality of short-term application of prosecution deadline. It clearly advocates that China should use foreign experience and methods for reference. Specific cases’application of short-term prosecution deadline must be on the premise that administrative body has performed the obligations of teaching remedies to administrative counterpart legally.The chapter four would study the Remedy for Prosecution Deadline. The problem that whether parties still have remedy procedures and ways after prosecution deadline expires has basically not referred to in China’s academic. The chapter’s main content is to introduce the remedy procedures and ways after prosecution deadline expires in extraterritorial countries and districts, including specific system arrangements and methods such as "run procedure again" and administrative compensation and so on. On that basis, the paper has made a self-criticism to the existing defects and problems of realistic demands of "run procedure again", current procedure of administrative compensation and limitation rules in practice in China, and offered several proposals on introducing "run procedure again" system at the right time and further revised and perfected the current procedure of administrative compensation and limitation rules in China. The author takes that how administrative counterpart can effectively find the remedy procedures and ways in practice as foothold, from the perspective of integrity of administrative remedy system and comparative law, specially discussing the possible procedure and way that administrative counterpart still can get after prosecution deadline expires, so as to further perfect the rule system of solving administrative dispute.