作者：胡建淼
作者介绍：中央党校（国家行政学院）专家工作室教授
出版日期：2022年8月9日
内容提要 “无效行政行为”是行政违法理论发展的一种必然结果。早期的行政法控制行政违法的普遍手段以“撤销”为主，而撤销则建立在狭隘的“行政违法”概念基础之上。以德国为代表的大陆法系国家则将行政违法（瑕疵）区分为一般违法与重大而明显的违法两类，为后者建立了确认“无效”制度。中国也有类似的历史轨迹和制度理论。2014年《行政诉讼法》的修正在确立“无效行政行为”前提下，于“撤销”制度之外补充了“确认无效”的司法手段。但在“确认无效”之诉普遍确立的今天，认定“无效行政行为”的标准尚未周全。为此，有必要立足全球视野，全面而深入地揭示无效行政行为的具体情形，推进无效行政行为认定标准的完善。
关键词 无效行政行为 可撤销行政行为 越权行为 重大且明显违法 无效确认之诉
Abstract: The invalid administrative act is a result of the development of administrative violation theory. In the early days of administrative law, the common means of controlling administrative violations are mainly ‘revocation’, and revocation is based on a narrow concept of ‘administrative violation’. However, the civil law countries, represented by Germany, divide administrative violations (defects) into two categories: general violations and major and obvious violations, and establish a system of confirmation of ‘invalidity’ for the latter. China has a similar historical track and institutional theory. The 2014 amendment of the Administrative Procedure Law added the judicial means of ‘confirming invalidation’ to the ‘revocation’ system under the premise of establishing an ‘invalid administrative act’. Today, the ligation of ‘confirming invalidation’ has been well established, but the standard of confirming invalid administrative acts has not been completely established. it is necessary to comprehensively and deeply reveal the specific situation of invalid administrative acts, and promote the improvement of the criteria for determining invalid administrative acts.