| dc.contributor | 法律系 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 劉定基 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | Liu, Ting-Chi | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2024-09 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 29-十一月-2024 14:04:00 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 29-十一月-2024 14:04:00 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 29-十一月-2024 14:04:00 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/154532 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 關於行政法院對於行政機關行政行為的審查密度，學說討論累積至今，已經有相當的資料。本文希望在既有的研究上進一步展開，因此特別針對行政法院自2015年起至2022年中，審查「國家通訊傳播委員會（下稱NCC）」行政行為合法性的案件（共計96件判決）進行深入分析研究。尤其，在經過前述諸多學理有關審查密度的探討與司法院大法官解釋的推波助瀾後，行政法院在審查NCC的行政決定時，究竟是抱持著如何的審查密度？是與一般行政機關無異？或是（高度）尊重？又或是一個涉及多項考量因素的動態量尺？我們是否可以從近年來的判決中歸納整理出特定原則，或是並無規則可循？從學理反思，又有什麼可以提出檢討或建議的地方。 | |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The issue of administrative courts' standard of review on administrative decisions has produced abundant studies. Based on existing research, this article aims to conduct an in-depth analysis focusing on administrative courts' review on decisions of National Communications Commission (NCC). After analyzing 96 judgments, this article tries to answer the following questions: What are the standards of review adopted by the administrative courts when they decide the legality of NCC's decisions? Is it similar to that of reviewing other agencies' decisions or is it a more deferential standard? What are the factors that will affect the standard of review? In the end, this article provides several recommendations for administrative courts to decide an appropriate stand of review on different types of NCC decisions. | |
| dc.format.extent | 130 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | text/html | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 臺北大學法學論叢, No.131, pp.1-73 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 行政法院; 國家通訊傳播委員會; 審查密度; 判斷餘地 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Administrative court; National Communications Commission; Standard of review; Administrative discretion | |
| dc.title (題名) | 論行政法院對國家通訊傳播委員會行政行為的審查密度—2015-2022年案例的觀察 | |
| dc.title (題名) | A Study on Administrative Courts’ Standard of Review on Decisions of National Communications Commission: An Observation on Cases from 2015 to 2022 | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
