Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Other Titles:||Competitor Litigation in Economic Administrative Law|
Competitor Litigation;Third-party Actions;Standing (Locus Standi);Subjective Public Rights;The Doctrine of the Protective Scope of the Norm;The Formula for Conflict Reconciliation;Freedom of Competition;Government Enterprise;The Three Foundations to Restrict Public Economic Activities
|Issue Date:||2016-06-20 10:03:06 (UTC+8)|
Competitor litigation is a legal method used to assist the court’s decision on resources distribution or progress by administrative organizations. It is categorized under third-party actions. In response to modern administrative innovations such as privatizing administrative tasks, dissolving control, opening markets, and introducing competition mechanisms, competitor litigation has been spreading at an ever increasing rate. Taiwanese administrative courts and administrative law scholars consider the doctrine of the protective scope of the norm as the criterion whether a third-party has a standing or not. The doctrine of the protective scope of the norm is based upon the administrative law relationship between the higher status state and the disadvantaged individual. Nevertheless, when applying the theory to the concept of economic administrative law, multiple conflict legal relationships between private-private and private-state entities, seems unwieldy and difficult to operate. Recently, several German scholars came up with an operational formula for the doctrine of the protective scope of the norm. The formula focuses on facing multiple conflict administrative law relationships. The formula is especially worthwhile for our administrative law theories and practices to refer to when judging if the plaintiff of a competitor has a standing or not. The possibility for the people to file a suit to terminate the state’s competing economic activities is also an important issue to study on the competitor litigation in economic administrative law. According to recent judgments of the German Federal Administrative Court, it is possible for the people to file suit against the state’s competing economic activities. The freedom of competition in German Basic Law or the public purpose clause for public economic activities in communal law is now considering being the basis of standing for the plaintiff. So far, Taiwan has no made judgment related to such litigation. However, numerous public enterprises have started to use business management as a method to run it themselves, and consider profiting as its final goal. The positive actions made by the German court in order to protect private competitors’ rights are well worth studying. It could be useful and inspiring to our administrative law theories and practices.
Chengchi law review
|Appears in Collections:||[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.