On The Direct Loss Of Administrative Compensation

According to Article 36 of the State Compensation Law of our country,we can see that our country adopts the principle of compensation for direct losses without compensation for indirect damages in respect of compensation for damage to property rights.However,although there is a clear principle of compensation,there is no single criterion that can be clearly distinguished between direct loss and indirect loss for reference.Though the compensation law has passed its legislative review four times in the past five years,the amendment to the State Compensation Law adopted on October 26,2012 has not yet provided a clear definition of the direct loss,but only continues to follow the old rules.The concept of "direct loss" was introduced from civil law.However,in practical application,its purpose and concept ran counter to civil law.The explanation of direct loss by academic circles failed to provide useful guidance to judicial practice,but deepened the confusion of judicial practice.Leading to the court in the case of direct damages indefinitely unable to follow.For this reason,many people in the field of legal theory and practice have made some criticisms and called for indirect losses to be included in the compensation so as to make up for the victim’s losses and safeguard their legitimate rights and interests.Based on the definition of direct loss and indirect loss,combined with the relevant provisions of the direct loss of administrative compensation in extraterritorial areas,according to the current situation of the application of direct losses in judicial practice in our country and the present state compensation law has not been amended.We can establish "the standard of inevitable loss under normal circumstances" and introduce "the direct cause and effect relationship",the distinction criteria between direct damages and indirect losses of property damage in state compensation are clarified and some indirect losses are further incorporated into the scope of compensation to solve such problems.This article is divided into four parts,the beacon ground Fuyuan v.Beacon City Market Supervision Authority claiming 270 million state compensation in one case leads to thinking about the scope of administrative compensation,the first part is the general theory of direct compensation for administrative damage,mainly introduces China’s current Some provisions for direct loss.The second part is the extraterritorial determination of direct losses of administrative compensation,understanding of the determination of administrative compensation abroad,for reference.The third part is the status quo and existing problems of the determination of the direct loss of administrative compensation in our country.According to the status quo of China’s direct loss determination of administrative compensation applied in judicial practice,it points out the problems existing in the direct loss of administrative compensation in China.The fourth part puts forward suggestions to improve the identification of direct loss of administrative compensation in China.