Study On The Judicial Application Of The Principle Of Ripeness In China

The principle of Ripeness refers to the controversial administrative act can enter the judicial review process only when the prosecution time is ripe.It originated from the judicial practice in the United States,the Supreme Court ’ s interpretation of its connotation in the 1967 Abbott case made the principle of Ripeness a threshold principle in the field of administrative litigation.After considerable development,it has become an important basic principle in contemporary administrative litigation.China ’ s law does not specify the principle of Ripeness,but more and more courts in judicial practice based on the principle of Ripeness.Starting from judicial practice,this thesis examines the specific application of mature principle in China.First of all,from the perspective of the jurisprudence of the Supreme People ’ s Court,it can be seen that the earliest application of the mature principle in China can be traced back to the case of Lai Hengan in 1999,in which the Supreme People ’ s Court pointed out that immature administrative acts should not enter the court review procedure.The case in which the principle of Ripeness was truly applied was the case of Wang Junliang in 2016,in which the Supreme Court focused on the criteria for reviewing the form of the principle of Ripeness.The substantive standard of the principle of Ripeness is reflected in the Supreme Court ’ s No.69 guiding case issued in the same year.So far,the dual standard of the principle of Ripeness can find traces in the relevant cases of the Supreme Court.From the perspective of the specific application of 612 judicial cases,there are great problems in the application of judicial practice in China.First,many courts do not fully understand the connotation of the principles,confusing the difference between the timing of prosecution and the scope of accepting cases,the qualification of plaintiffs and the duration of prosecution.Second,the standards of the ripeness principle are not uniform,and there is even the suspicion of abusing the ripeness principle.The similarities and differences of specific judgment standards are based on two dimensions of court decisions.The standards established by the Supreme Court are limited by the narrow type of behavior involved,which makes the reference of local courts have greater ambiguity.This thesis puts forward targeted suggestions in the conclusion part.