| 摘要: |
| 《最高人民法院关于审理行政协议案件若干问题的规定》第6条对反诉做出了排除性规定。该规定虽然避免了导入反诉制度所可能产生的新的程序风险，但同时也保留了在行政主体诉权领域存在的规范漏洞。行政诉讼反诉主要是实体上具有平等法律地位主体之间的当事人诉讼，其实体法基础源于行政主体与公民之间的权利义务结构。行政诉讼反诉以存在独立的诉讼标的为前提，在一般给付诉讼和确认诉讼中存在适用空间。建议将来修改《行政诉讼法》时对行政主体的起诉权与反诉权进行并置规定，在立法技术上通过诉讼类型或者案件类型对反诉的适用范围进行限制，并对反诉的特殊程序规则进行明确规定。 |
| 关键词: 行政反诉制度 一般给付诉讼 行政协议案件 准用规范 |
| DOI： |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目: |
|
| The Litigation Structure and Creation Path of the Counterclaim System in Administrative Litigation |
|
|
|
|
| Abstract: |
| Article 6 of the Supreme People's Court's Provisions on Several Issues in the Trial of Administrative Agreement Cases provides an exclusionary provision for counterclaims. Although this provision avoids new procedural risks that may arise from the introduction of the counterclaim system, it retains regulatory loopholes that exist in the area of the administrative subject's right to sue. The counterclaim in administrative litigation is mainly litigant litigation between subjects with equal legal status in the entity. The basis of its substantive law originates from the structure of rights and obligations between the administrative subject and the citizen. The counterclaim of administrative litigation is premised on the existence of an independent litigation object, and there is room for the application in general payment and confirmation litigation. It is suggested that when the “Administrative Litigation Law” is amended in the future, the juxtaposition of the administrative subjects right to sue and the right to counterclaim should be provided; the scope of counterclaim's application should be limited with the type of lawsuit or case in terms of legislative technology; the special procedural rules for counterclaim should be clarified with regulations. |
| Key words: Administrative Counterclaim System, General Payment Lawsuits, Administrative Agreement Cases, Permitted Norms |
