检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:钱方 Qian Fang(Anhui University, Hefei Anhui 230000)
机构地区:[1]安徽大学,安徽合肥230000
出 处:《安徽警官职业学院学报》2019年第1期28-31,共4页Journal of Anhui Vocational College of Police Officers
摘 要:现代行政管理模式的转变和发展使行政协议在国家行政中的地位变得日益突出,随着行政协议在实务中的广泛应用,协议纠纷的案件也与日俱增。2014年行政诉讼法修改,正式将行政诉讼作为行政协议的救济渠道。然而目前我国行政协议纠纷的司法救济无论是在立法上亦或是在实务操作中均不完善,其理论研究上均缺乏系统性。从行政协议的概念界定出发,分析我国行政协议纠纷的类型及司法救济机制中存在的问题,有助于筑牢我国行政协议纠纷解决的"最后一道防线"。The transformation and development of the modern administrative management mode has made the increasingly prominent status of administrative agreements in the state administration. With the wide application of administrative agreements in practice, the number of disputes in agreements has also increased. With the amendment of Administrative Litigation Law, the administrative litigation was established as a relief channel for administrative agreements in 2014. However, at present, the judicial relief of administrative disputes in China is neither perfect in legislation nor in practice, its theoretical research is lack of systematicity. Starting from the definition of administrative agreement, this article analyzed the types of administrative agreement disputes in China and the problems existing in the judicial relief mechanism, which will help to build the "last line of defense" for the settlement of administrative agreements in China.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.12