行政诉讼中的裁判事实如何生成?——基于事实认知层次的分析  

How Are Adjudicative Facts Generated in Administrative Litigation? An Analysis Based on the Cognition of Facts

作　　者：张硕 

机构地区：[1]武汉大学博士后流动站

出　　处：《法制与社会发展》2022年第4期103-120,共18页Law and Social Development

基　　金：中国博士后科学基金面上资助项目“行政违法取证行为的司法审查研究”(2020M672395)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：在诉讼活动中,法官对事实问题的认知都因循从案件事实到要件事实再到裁判事实的认知逻辑,合格的事实认定应是理性认知的产物。行政诉讼中的事实认知因涉及权力间关系问题而体现出区别于民事诉讼、刑事诉讼的特殊性。在案件事实认知阶段,法官以行政案卷为基础,结合法庭调查情况完成对“发生了什么”以及“行政机关如何处理”等案件事实的整体性认知。在要件事实认知阶段,法官按照序位逐一对案件事实作法律归属论证,排查行政行为的违法项。完成合法性审查后,法官结合价值判断,确定裁判意向与裁判事实范围,启动裁判事实认知。根据裁判意向的不同,法官可在行政基础事实、行政行为事实、诉讼合法性要件事实与情形变更事实中选定一项或多项作为裁判事实,并结合证据完成事理融贯的事实认定。In litigation activities,judges’cognition of facts follows the cognitive logic from the case facts to the essential facts and then to the adjudicative facts,and the qualified factual determination should be the product of rational cognition.The cognition of facts in administrative litigation is different from civil litigation and criminal litigation because it involves the relationship between powers.In the cognition of case facts,the judge takes the administrative file as the basis and completes the overall cognition of the case facts such as“what happened”and“how the administrative organ handled”with the court investigation.At the stage of cognition of essential facts,the judge adopts the method of sequential exclusion for the legal attribution of the case facts and investigates the illegal items of the administrative act.After completing the legality review,the judge combines value judgment to determine the scope of adjudicative intent and adjudicative facts to initiate the cognition of adjudicative facts.According to the intention of referee,the judge can select one or more of the facts of the administrative basis,the facts of the administrative act,the facts of the legality of lawsuit and the facts of the change of circumstances as the adjudicative facts and combines the evidence to complete a coherent factual determination.

关 键 词：行政诉讼事实 案件事实 裁判事实 事理逻辑 

分 类 号：D925.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]