The courts in China take two different approaches to whether the executive reminders made by administrative organs before administrative enforcement are actionable,one considers that executive reminders are "process administrative acts","procedural informative acts" and "do not produce actual rights and obligations" and therefore are not actionable."does not produce the actual rights and obligations" and therefore not litigation,the other approach is not a generalized implementation of the call is not litigation,but to recognize the specific nature of the call belongs to the scope of administrative litigation,in specific cases can be litigation.The theoretical community for the call is also two different attitudes,one that the implementation of the call belongs to the external legal effect of administrative processing,so all can be sued;another view is that the implementation of the call can be sued,should be the implementation of the call whether the rights and obligations of the parties as the standard.Thus,it can be seen that the implementation of the call is controversial in the theoretical and practical circles,and there is no uniform judgment standard.In this paper,on the basis of typical domestic cases of enforcement reminders,combined with the legal provisions of the legislation on enforcement reminders and the relevant extraterritorial legal norms of administrative coercion,two different types of enforcement reminders of pecuniary obligations and behavioral obligations in practice are analyzed.On the basis of the existing theory of the nature of the enforcement of the call "factual behavior" and "legal behavior",the key to determine whether the enforcement of the call is actionable is whether the call creates new obligations for the parties,especially the enforcement of penalty matters.Thus providing a clear standard for the actionability of executive reminders,and to solve the administrative enforcement of the dispute arising from the enforcement of the reminder to provide new ideas. |