摘要： 伴随给付之诉的大量涌现,请求权审查模式开始为行政诉讼所适用。与传统的合法性审查模式不同,请求权审查模式下,作为公法诉讼的行政诉讼与私法诉讼并无本质区分,二者所要处理的都是具体法律关系之下关系主体间的实体权利纠纷,诉讼也因此成为对实体请求权和实体法的忠实贯彻。请求权审查模式以公权利和实体请求权作为实体法基础,又以实体法思考、诉权的概括主义和权利要素同时在起诉条件和胜诉条件上的支配性作为其适用前提,其不仅已被适用于课予义务之诉和给付之诉,同样可为撤销之诉和确认之诉的重新理解和建构提供启发。但请求权审查模式同样受到体系不融贯,适用有局限以及对实体法和诉讼法关系的先验性判断存疑的质疑,这也说明复杂的行政诉讼制度并不能被封闭在单一坐标之下。

关键词: 公权利, 实体请求权, 合法性审查模式, 请求权审查模式

Abstract: Along with the emergence of a large number of claims for payment, the right to request review mode has also begun to be applied to administrative litigation.Unlike the traditional lawfulness review mode, under the right to request review mode, there is no essential difference between administrative litigation as public law litigation and private law litigation; both deal with disputes over substantive rights between subjects under specific legal relationships.Claims review model of subjective public rights and substantive claims are the basis of substantive law, and substantive law thinking, the generalization of the right of action and the elements of the right at the same time are the conditions of prosecution and the conditions of success as the premise of its application.They not only have been applied to the payment of the lawsuit, but also useful for the revocation of the lawsuit and the confirmation of the lawsuit for the reconstruction of the re-understanding and construction of the same inspiration.However, just like the traditional legitimacy review model, the claim review model also suffers from systemic incoherence, limited application, and challenges over a priori determination of substantive law/procedural law relationships.This also shows that, although the purpose and basic structure of administrative litigation, including revocation, should maintain a certain degree of integration with the norms of substantive law, the litigation system itself is not a univocal deduction from substantive law alone.

Key words: Public Right, Substantive Claim-Rights, Legality Review Model, Claims Review Model