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:赵宏 ZHAO Hong(China University of Political Science and Law)
机构地区:[1]中国政法大学法学院
出 处:《法学家》2023年第1期11-26,191,共17页The Jurist
基 金:国家社科基金一般项目“行政法上第三人的权利保护研究”(21BFX050)的阶段性成果。
摘 要:伴随行政机关对城市空间利益分配的介入,在私法相邻关系法和私法相邻权之外出现了公法相邻关系法和公法相邻权。德国法最初是从基本权利导出公法相邻权,在遭遇有违宪法分配秩序的诘问后,联邦行政法院在猪圈案判决中提出了考虑要求。考虑要求创造性地实现了从客观法到邻人主观公权利的转化,也使建筑法规范自此具备了邻人保护效果。在嗣后的发展演替中,考虑要求渐次从公法邻人保护体系的核心退居辅助性位置,并演变为与普遍邻人保护相对应的部分邻人保护。考虑要求的适用有显著性、个别性和范围可限性、法律上值得保护性以及预测可能性等要素的要求,这些要素使考虑要求既延续了保护规范理论的一般思考,又对其在具体法领域的适用进行了重要拓展。纳入考虑要求无论对扩展规划许可诉讼中邻人原告资格的范围,还是缓解一般行政诉讼原告资格判定中事实影响和规范依据间的张力都有所助益。With the intervention of administrative organs in the distribution of urban space interests, public neighboring law and public neighboring rights also appear in addition to private neighboring law and private neighboring rights. German law initially appealed the derivation of public neighboring rights to fundamental rights,but after being heckled by the distribution order of constitutional law, the German federal administrative court put forward a theory called Consideration Requirements in the judgment of the Pigsty case. This theory creatively realizes the transformation from objective law to the subjective public rights of neighbors, and also makes the norms of construction law have the effect of neighborhood protection since then. In the subsequent development and succession, it gradually retreats from the core of the public neighborhood protection system to the auxiliary position, and evolves into the partial neighborhood protection opposite to the universal neighborhood protection. The application of the Consideration Requirements includes such elements as significance, individuality and scope limitation, legal protection and prediction possibility. These elements make the theory not only continue the general thinking of the Protection Norm theory, but also expand its application in the specific field of law. Consideration Requirements is beneficial not only to expanding the scope of the plaintiff’s qualification of neighbors in planning permission litigation, but also to resolving the tension between the factual impacts on the judgment of plaintiff’s qualification in general administrative litigation and the normative basis.
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:216.73.216.201