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:李永超[1] 杨兰 LI Yong-chao;YANG Lan(School of Law,Zhengzhou University,Zhengzhou,Henan 450000,China)
出 处:《河北工程大学学报(社会科学版)》2021年第1期81-85,共5页Journal of Hebei University of Engineering(Social Science Edition)
基 金:教育部教育立法研究基地项目(编号:JYLF1010)阶段性研究成果。
摘 要:信赖保护原则在我国行政法上体现为《行政许可法》第8条和第69条,自2000年在行政许可法中确立,该原则不断完善并广泛应用于司法实践,在限制公权力上有着显著效果。但是作为在20世纪初逐步在我国行政法领域兴起的原则,无论在理论层面还是司法运用中都需要完善和进步。运用案例研究方法对司法实践中信赖保护原则在适用框架上存在的理论与实践的冲突问题以及该原则的适用缺乏程序性保护等问题进行研究和讨论。The principle of trust protection is embodied in the article 8 and article 69 of the"Administrative License Law"in China's administrative law.Established in the Administrative License Law since 2000,the principle has been constantly improved and widely applied in judicial practice,and has a remarkable effect on restricting public power.However,as a principle gradually emerging in the field of administrative law in our country in the early 20th century,it needs to be improved in both theoretical level and judicial application.This paper USES case study method to study and discuss the conflict between theory and practice in the application framework of the principle of trust protection in judicial practice and the lack of procedural protection in its application.
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:216.73.216.229