| As a kind of administrative behavior,administrative factual acts currently exists in judicial practice.On November 1,2014,China ’s newly revised “Administrative Procedure Law” changed the scope of accepting cases from “specific administrative acts” to “administrative acts”,which to a large extent ensured that the administrative factual acts entered the scope of administrative litigation.In practice,administrative factual acts still has still a litigation system to be perfected.Administrative factual acts refers to administrative actions made by administrative subjects,which have no legal effect to the outside world and in fact can affect the administrative counterparts in rights and obligations,and some acts of administrative facts may even damage the rights and obligations of the counterpart.With the continuous development of society,administrative factual acts will also become an important way for administrative subjects to manage.However,in practice,many courts have errors in the determination of administrative factual acts,and some courts have not even identified administrative factual acts as administrative acts.This also makes the litigation about administrative factual acts even stay in the discussion of the scope of accepting case.This paper first analyzes the theory of administrative factual acts and makes a comparative analysis of the administrative factual behavior theory in Germany,France and Chinese Taiwan.Through the relevant theoretical research of different countries(regions),as well as the comparison and analysis of corresponding concepts,the concept and characteristics of administrative fact acts are obtained.Secondly,by summarizing and analyzing the 123 cases uploaded by the "China Judgements Online",by summarizing to direct at the administrative factual behavior standards and the problems in the lawsuit,in practice it was found there are still no unified standards for determining administrative factual behavior,imperfect regulations during litigation,single litigation form and imperfect mediation system.The comparison with Taiwan area of China,the corresponding solutions for the above-mentioned problems are put forward.The administrative factual acts can be clearly divided into a kind of administrative behavior so as to ensure that the litigation remedy of the administrative factual behavior is unblocked.In the absence of specific rules of the administrative fact of the litigation period,the relevant provisions in the civil law may be invoked to supplement the deficiencies of the original provisions.The litigation form of administrative factual acts could refer to the relevant provisions of nameless action in Taiwan to enrich the litigation form of the administrative behavior.The mediation of administrative factual acts should also be improved with the intervention of a third party. |
