| There is no right without relief, and no damage without compensation. Administrative compensation is an integral part of national compensation. It refers to the compensation responsibility undertaken by the state when the state administrative departments and their staff illegally perform their duties and do damages to the citizens, legal persons and other organizations while performing their state administrative power. In the cases of administrative compensation, criterion of liability and requisites to constitute liability are two closely related important categories which both aim at solving the problem of deciding the kind of damages for which national compensation should be made. The criterion of reliability, reflecting the value orientation of administrative compensation and deciding damage scope, is the major basis and standard of national compensation, as well as the premise and basis of requisites to constitute liability. Requisites to constitute liability are the embodiment of criterion of reliability and are also the criteria used to judge the validity of administrative compensation. Guided by criterion of liability, the judges, with the help of the theory of requisites to constitute liability, are able to make proper judgments of the validity of administrative compensation and then decide if the compensation should be made by the state.The criterion of liability adopted by administrative compensation in our country is the criterion of irregularity, which is to say reliability is decided according to illegal acts of public duties. Under the criterion of liability, requisites to constitute liability consist of three basic elements. The first element is administrative infringement act. It is the root cause of national administrative compensation. The second element is damage fact. It is the premise of administrative compensation. There is no damage without compensation. The third element is causal relationship. It is the tie between the liability subject and damage, and is the basis and premise to decide liability of irregularity undertaken by liability subject towards private party. At present, in our country, legislative and judicial interpretation about liability criterion of irregularity in administrative compensation and the requisites to constitute liability are not very definite, and the views towards these from the academic circles are different, both of which make it difficult for the people's court to judge the cases of administrative compensation.This article makes analysis and exploration of the judicial confirmation made by the people's court in judging the cases of administrative compensation from four aspects. The first part is the theoretical analysis of criterion of liability of administrative compensation. From the basic theories of national compensation which is the main element influencing the choices made by the state of its criterion of liability, this article makes comparative analysis of several common criteria and in particular, the liability criterion of irregularity chosen by administrative compensation in our country and its deficiency in practice. In addition, it also proposes that it should be the basic value orientation of the criterion to make up for damages, based on social burden and the final aim of establishing national administrative compensation system. It also points out there are at least two criterion of liability in the system of our country, i.e., criterion of irregularity and criterion of error, which are adopted for differentcases.The second part deals with judicial confirmation of administrative infringement acts. It defines mainly the following concepts and scopes such as the subject and the nature of infringement acts (including duty acts and duty-related acts), irregularity, and especially the exact meaning of "law" which is used to judge administrative infringement acts. The meaning of "law" varies with different means adopted by the victims for compensation and with different confirming organizations.The third part deals with judi... |
PDF Full Text Request