On The Defects And Perfections Of Judicial Review Of Administrative Agreement In China

With the rise of welfare administration and payment of the administrative,increasing public affairs.Governments began to seek cooperation with the private sector for their talent,technology,capital and management experience.In order to improve the acceptability of the administrative,China through the flexible administrative agreement instead of a rigid high power.Based on the administrative agreement and agreement of administrative agreement,and based on the characteristics of duality of administrative agreement,this article makes a deep discussion on the existing problems and Perfecting Ways of judicial review in China.The content of this article is divided into four chapter:The first chapter is the basic theory of administrative agreement,Mainly on discusses the definition,classification of administrative agreement basic concepts.Discussed the difference between the administrative agreement and civil contract,it discusses the value orientation,to balance theory as an administrative agreement value orientation of judicial review.The second chapter is the status quo of judicial review,and discusses the current situation and problems of the judicial review of administrative agreement in the scope of the case,the plaintiff qualification,the object of judicial review and the distribution of the burden of proof.The third chapter is related foreign laws.It introduces relevant laws and regulations of judicial review of extraterritorial administrative agreements,and provides beneficial reference for the improvement of judicial review of administrative agreements in China.The fourth chapter: the perfection of the judicial review of the administrative agreement of our country,first,to unify the standards for the determination of the administrative agreement.Second,the plaintiff qualifications of the administrative organs and the third persons are clearly defined.Third,the construction of two-way review model.Fourth,it advocates the rational distribution of the burden of proof.