法定行政程序的扩张性解释及其限度——最高人民法院6号指导案例之评析  

The Expansion Interpretation and Limitations of Legal Administrative Procedures:Comment on the No.6 Guiding Case of the Supreme People's Court

作　　者：章志远[1] 

机构地区：[1]苏州大学法学院,教授博士生导师苏州215006

出　　处：《浙江社会科学》2013年第1期64-71,157,共9页Zhejiang Social Sciences

基　　金：笔者主持的教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地2012年重大项目"城镇化进程中行政纠纷多元解决机制研究"(编号12JJD840014);苏州大学东吴公法与比较法研究所2012年度招标项目"江苏行政纠纷解决机制研究"的系列研究成果之一

摘　　要：通过对既往行政审判实践的观察,可以看出最高人民法院6号指导案例有关没收较大数额财产的行政处罚决定也属于听证范围的宣示只是一次波澜不惊的司法重申而已。该案的裁判理由显示,法院经由文义解释和目的解释方法的运用,对法定行政程序作出了扩张性解释,并提炼出行政处罚听证程序适用范围的判断标准。受司法机关的现实地位、法律解释技术的运用和案例指导制度的功能等因素的影响,法定行政程序扩张性解释的推广适用尚存在诸多限度。对基层司法经验的及时总结和凝练,有助于为中国行政程序法法典化的实现探索新的生长路径。Through the study on the former administrative trial practice in China, it can be seen that the administrative penalty decisions about confiscating larger amount of property, which are declared in the No.6 guiding case of the Supreme People's Court, belong to the scope of hearing, and the declaration is just a judicial reaffirmation. The judgment showed that the court made an expansion interpretation on the legal administrative procedure by applying literature and intent interpretation methodology, and extracted judging standards of the application scope of administrative penalty hearing procedure. Influenced by the current status of judicial authority, the application of legal interpretation technology and the functions of the case guidance system, the popularization of the expansion interpretation for legal administrative procedure still has a lot of limitations. A summarization and extraction of the judicial experience of the grass-roots courts in time will be beneficial to seek new approaches to fulfill the codification of China's administrative procedure law.

关 键 词：法定行政程序 扩张性解释 限度 

分 类 号：D926.2[政治法律—法学]