Administrative Law and Administrative Procedure Law Cases

Author: Ye Bifeng and Xu Chen, Editors
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2004-12-01
Features: The distinctive feature of this book lies in the authenticity and typicality of the selected cases. We believe that as cases in a case textbook, they should be real and have actually occurred, rather than being hypothetical or imagined. We found that in some works, the examples cited are based on hypothetical assumptions derived from knowledge and principles. Such assumptions cannot genuinely illustrate the practical application of knowledge and principles; they can only represent possibilities. Moreover, since they are hypothetical, one cannot exhaustively imagine them, often leading to analyses and comments lacking solid premises. This still focuses on explaining principles and knowledge rather than integrating them with practice, thereby failing to subject the results of thought—knowledge and principles—to practical testing through judgments. From an academic perspective, this is something that should be avoided. To demonstrate this authenticity, we have indicated the source of each case. At the same time, this is also done to respect the efforts of the original case authors. We believe that cases in a case textbook should be typical. Therefore, from the outset of writing, we required the authors to select cases as much as possible from The Gazette of the Supreme People's Court, Judicial Case Selection compiled by the Supreme People's Court China Applied Legal Research Institute, and China Judicial Case Annual compiled by the China Higher Judges Training Center (now the National Judges College) and the Law School of Renmin University of China. Cases can only be selected from other literature if they cannot be found in the aforementioned sources. Overall, we have largely met this requirement. Of course, the typical cases we refer to here are those that can clearly and fully illustrate a particular principle or knowledge point. Sometimes, such cases are not easily found. On one hand, this is because our case system lacks a perfect compilation and publication mechanism. On the other hand, some knowledge and principles are rarely reflected in cases, or certain issues have not yet entered the litigation process. For example, currently, Chinese courts cannot review the legality of administrative legislative acts, making it difficult to use more cases to explain and analyze knowledge and principles in this regard. Of course, this may also be related to the information resources of our authors. Due to the above reasons, this book may not fully align with the original intention of its compilation. This is something we will continue to strive for. Although the case system in this book is arranged as much as possible in the order of administrative law principles, it is not divided into chapters or sections due to the same reasons, as well as the fact that a single case often involves multiple principles. Additionally, the writing style and format of this book are consistent. Of course, regarding the tone and expression, although it has been uniformly edited, some differences may still exist.
(Note: The original Chinese text contains repeated sections. In the English translation, the repeated content has been retained as it is, with only the non-repeated parts translated.)