The Administrative Promises To Not Perform The Judicial Review Of The Case

With the advancement of service-oriented government construction,administrative promises with authority,unilaterality,and discretion have been widely used in practice.For the administrative promise court,it should consider that it should have the following elements: First,the powers,the administrative promise is made by the administrative agency within its scope of authority;second,the unilaterality,the administrative promise is the unilateral meaning of the administrative agency,and the consent of the counterparty is not required when making the decision;The third is the administrative nature.Administrative agencies make administrative promises to complete administrative management and services,and achieve better administrative results through this means.However,there are different understandings of object requirements,content requirements,and formal requirements.On the object element,there are three types of disagreements: the object of the promise is specific,the object is not specific,and the object may be specific.There are some courts that the promised content must be an administrative act in the future;In terms of formal requirements,some courts emphasized that administrative agencies' administrative commitments need to be made in an open manner.The court examined the legitimacy of administrative promises in the following aspects: First,it met the terms of reference,and compliance with the terms of reference meant that the subject of administrative promises should have the qualification to manage the affairs,that is,the basis for organizational law;Compliance with statutory responsibilities and compliance with statutory duties means that the contents of the administrative promises made by the administrative agencies are expressly stipulated by the law,that is,they have the basis of the behavior law;the third is the principle of conformity with the law,and the principle of conformity with the law is the administrative promise.The content does not contradict the superior law and is legal.When the counterparty petitioned the administrative agency to perform its administrative promise,the court examined that the administrative promise was lawful and effective,and the opposing person had implemented the conditions prescribed in the promise,the court ruled that the administrative organ performed,but the basis for the execution of the judgment in some cases was not consistent;Whenthe content promised by the administrative agency is not within its scope of authority,the court's judgment result varies according to the parties' requests.There have been two cases of confirmation of illegality and confirmation of invalidity.The basis for administrative enforcement of non-performance of the judgment in the case is not uniform.In order to maintain the consistency of judicial decisions in similar cases,the administrative agency has promised the counterparty to perform certain actions in the administrative agreement.When the contents of the promises of the administrative agency and the actions of the opposing parties are a two-way agreement,the administrative agency When the promise is not honored,the judgment of the administrative agreement shall be applied;when the act of the administrative agency is a unilateral administrative promise,and if the content of the promise is an administrative benefit,the judgment of payment shall apply,and otherwise the judgment shall be applied.In the confirmation judgment,when the administrative counterpart person requests for confirmation to be invalid and the subject of the administrative promise is not qualified or has no basis,such as a material and obvious violation of the law,the court shall confirm the invalidity.However,when the contents of administrative promises are generally illegal,in principle,they should be revoked.However,when it is inappropriate to revoke or judge the implementation of the five cases,it should be confirmed illegal.