过度诉讼及其司法规制  

Excessive Litigation and Its Judicial Regulation

作　　者：何源 HE Yuan

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院 [2]美国哈佛大学法学院

出　　处：《法学评论》2024年第6期166-181,共16页Law Review

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“新《行政诉讼法》实施状况研究”(批准号:17BFX174)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：在过去几年中,面对部分公民反复大量提起行政诉讼,一些法院采取规制措施,不再受理此类诉讼并从严审查当事人今后的起诉。法院规制过度诉讼的正当性引发了争议。利用法院全量数据对行政诉讼状况进行实证分析发现,过度诉讼集中于部分中心城市法院和特定行政管理领域,却不成比例地挤占了公共资源。此类案件衍生但脱离于基础纠纷,虽然形式上符合法定受理条件,却无助于实现权益、监督行政与化解争议。法院对此予以适度规制,具有依据、目的和手段的正当性。为保障规制的合理有效,还应规范过度诉讼司法规制的认定标准、规制方式和制裁效力。法院实质性化解争议应以受理实质的纠纷为前提,行政诉讼的价值应在处理真实的矛盾中体现。In recent years,Chinese courts have been regulating persistent administrative litigation initiated by citizens,resulting in measures of non-acceptance for such lawsuits and stringent reviews of future legal actions by the parties involved.The legitimacy of this approach in curbing excessive litigation has ignited controversy.Empirical analysis of complete data set from Chinese courts reveals that excessive litigation tends to cluster in major central city courts and specific administrative areas,disproportionately consuming public resources.Often,these cases stem from core disputes but diverge significantly,ostensibly meeting the statutory acceptance criteria but failing to protect rights,oversee administration,or resolve conflicts.The courts regulate excessive litigation is justified,which has the legitimacy of basis,purpose and means.Courts are encouraged to standardize criteria for identifying,regulating,and sanctioning such behavior to ensure fairness and efficacy.The court's substantive resolution of dispute should be based on the acceptance of substantive disputes,and the value of administrative litigation should be reflected in the handling of real contradictions.

关 键 词：行政诉讼 过度诉讼 滥用诉权 实质性解决争议 司法大数据 

分 类 号：D925.3[政治法律—诉讼法学] D925.1[政治法律—法学]