论结果除去请求权在行政诉讼中的实现路径 以霍菲尔德基本法律概念为视角

On the Implementation Approach of the Claim for Elimination of Unlawful Consequences in the Administrative Litigation Law From a Perspective of the Hohfeldian Analytical System

修订后的《行政诉讼法》新增了给付判决和补救判决两种判决类型,学界由此开始注意到公法上结果除去请求权的本土应用及其在我国行政诉讼中可能的实现路径。作为一种本质以自然上回复原状为目的的国家责任,结果除去请求权的产生有其德国法上特殊的制度背景,而其理论基础可由宪法条文出发,呈现出一种以主观公法权利为保护对象的权利保护阶层关系。借助霍菲尔德基本法律概念的分析,结果除去请求权应定位于权利保护第三层次上的权利或权力功能。对于我国行政诉讼法体系而言,结果除去请求权的实现路径,不应是《行政诉讼法》第76条所规定的补救判决,而应当且只能是第73条所规定的一般给付判决。

The amended Administrative Litigation Law has included two new types of judgements： the performance judgement and the remedial measures judgement. This brought attention to the localization of the Claim for Elimination of Unlawful Consequences and its implementation approach in the administrative litigation law. The Claim for Elimination of Unlawful Consequences, a state liability in nature, is to restore infringed right to its original condition. Originated from German legal system, it has its foundation on constitutional rights, which can be developed into a three--level protection mechanism. With the aid of the Hohfeldian analytical system, the Claim for Elimination of Unlawful Consequences can be represented by Rights or Power on the third level of the protection mechanism. The implementation approach of the Claim for Elimination of Unlawful Consequences in the Administrative Litigation Law lies in Article 73 the performance judgement rather than Article 76 the remedial measures judgemeat.