浅谈英国行政裁判所-英国论文代写－r51due

英国essay论文精选范文：“浅谈英国行政裁判所”，这篇论文讨论了英国行政裁判所制度。行政裁判所简称裁判所，是指在一般法院以外，由法律规定设立用以解决行政上的争端，以及公民相互间某些和社会政策有密切联系的争端的特别裁判机构。它作为英国行政法中所特有的制度，在其行政法制进程中起到了独特的作用。依据裁判所所裁判的事项，裁判所分为全国性、区域性或者地方性的组织。区域性或者地方性的裁判所分布各地、彼此独立。全国性的裁判所，一般有一个负全面责任的总裁或委员长，协调各裁判所的工作。

An administrative tribunal, referred to as a magistrate, refers to a special tribunal established by law in addition to a general court to resolve administrative disputes as well as disputes between citizens and certain social policies closely related to each other.

In the UK, there is controversy over the nature of the tribunal, whether the administrative adjudication is administrative or judicial, and the debate on the administration of administrative adjudication has ceased. The Franks Commission Report and the 1992 Court of Appeals and Investigations provide an indication of the UK's official attitude towards administrative adjudication as a complementary judicial relief mechanism for dispute resolution. With the implementation of the 2005 Constitutional Reform Act and the 2007 Judgment, Court and Enforcement Act, the debate seems to have settled. These two "constitutional laws" have declared that the judiciary is a member of the British judicial system and is protected by the principle of judicial independence.

According to the matter of the referee, the tribunal is divided into national, regional or local organizations. Regional or local judgments distributed throughout, independent of each other. A national tribunal generally has a president or chairman who is fully responsible and coordinates the work of the tribunals.

The Board of Commissioners recommended that the Presidential system should be applied more extensively to professional tribunals. Let the president become the head of the system in the referee. The system of president helps to weaken the connection between the tribunal and the executive, improve the independence of the court to the executive, help to increase the flexibility of the specific issues dealt with by the judges, make the decision more consistent and prevent the same rule When applicable, vary from region to region.

In 2007 the United Kingdom carried out reforms, forming a new two-level structure of the referee. The jurisdiction of the existing United Kingdom magistrates' courts was designed to be transferred to two new tribunals, the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal, in accordance with the Designs of the Magistrates, Courts and Enforcement Acts. The former is mainly responsible for hearing cases of first instance, can handle the facts and legal issues. The latter is mainly responsible for accepting appeals against the decision of the first instance. The two tribunals will be divided into several tribunals, each of which is responsible for one category of cases. November 3, 2008, the unified system of the official referee was born. The Court of First Instance has set up social security courts, health, education and social welfare tribunals, war and military compensation tribunals, and tax courts. The Appellate Tribunal has established administrative appeals courts, financial and tax courts and land courts.

Anglo - American law system pursues adversarialism in civil procedure, and adopts adversarial lawsuit which is separated by fact - judge and law - judge. In the adversarial system, the judge's task is not to discover the truth of the case, but as the arbiter of the case. Confrontation in the UK has a long tradition, not only the court model of the trial, but also constitute the basic mode of the British referee ruling.

http://www.51due.net/writing/essay/sample30958.html

The English courts are not subject to strict rules of evidence as courts do, and the rules of evidence in the courts are relatively lenient, such as hearsay evidence, and members of the tribunal can rely on their own experience and knowledge to make judgments, not limited to facts submitted at hearings. The British judiciary has the right to call the witnesses to the hearing and answer the questions raised by the magistrates. The forms of witness testimony include oral evidence at the hearing, written statements by witnesses, summaries of testimonies or affidavits. Testimonials in the form of telephone, video, etc., may also be accepted in the context of a court decision.

In the UK, there is a lack of uniform rules of procedure between the various tribunals. The Commission has been working on the development and harmonization of procedural rules among the various types of tribunals, as well as on the merits of the rules of procedure. Through the research, we find that the procedure of the tribunal is similar to that of the administrative reconsideration procedure in our country, including the procedures before the hearing, the procedure in the hearing and the decision of the tribunal. Therefore, the procedural issues of administrative adjudication in this not to repeat.

According to the "Magistrates, Courts and Enforcement Act", the former Administrative Tribunal Commission was abolished from 1 November 2007 and replaced by the new Administrative Judicial and Adjudicatory Commission. First, the organization of the entire system and any one of the tribunal and the daily supervision of the work, and report; secondly, on particularly important issues, the entire system of the judiciary And any tribunal to investigate and report; and, secondly, to review and comment on parliamentary legislation that has entered into force and is proposed to be relevant to the tribunal.

In order to ensure that the judiciary is impartial and independent in its handling of cases, the United Kingdom has designed its own procedural rules for administrative adjudication. With the May 19, 2008, the procedural committee was formally established. At present, the Rules of Appeal Tribunal and the Rules of First Instance Tribunals have been introduced as the basic procedural rules of the tribunal. Although the magistrate has not complied with its previous ruling, this does not mean that it does not do so in practice. Article 23 of the "Court of Appeal, Courts and Enforcement Act" grants this authority to the Senior Chairman of the tribunal, who may, in fact, give jurisprudence certain judgments by making practical guidelines.

There is no inherent right to appeal to the adjudicator. The main channels of appeal can be divided into the following three categories.

In accordance with the provisions of the 2007 Jurisdiction, Courts and Enforcement Act, the jurisdiction of the existing United Kingdom magistrates' courts is transferred to two new tribunals, the First Trial and Appeal Tribunals. In case of dissatisfaction with the ruling of the first instance tribunal, the appeal may be appealed to the corresponding appeal tribunal.

In some cases, an appeal may be lodged with the Minister against a decision of the Tribunal. Such provisions are rare, most of the cases need to be judged by policy.

In accordance with section 11 of the Lawyers and Investigations Act 1992, an individual who "refuses to accept a point of law" has the right to file an appeal against the decision. He may file a complaint with the High Court, or may, in accordance with the rules of the Court, require the tribunal to present the case to the High Court. The court may make all the decisions that it ought to have made by the court, or it may return the case to the tribunal, and the magistrate may, on the basis of the opinion of the High Court, revisit or make a fresh decision.

The practice of the reform of administrative adjudication shows that how to allocate judicial power has never been a technical problem of rationalization, not only in the field of law, but also in connection with the social changes in a specific period. The reform of the English administrative tribunals has implications for us at least in the following ways:

Whether administrative reconsideration, or administrative ruling, its essence is the judicial act. We judge whether a public power act is not a judicial act, the key is not the name of the organ or the subordination of the system, but only from the organ composition and operation mode to examine whether it is consistent with or generally in line with the characteristics of the judicial power: independence, After the event, passive, controversial, with execution and so on. Because, whether administrative reconsideration or administrative ruling, although the exercise of power by the executive authorities, but did not change the nature of the judicial power, the difference is that these powers in different organs of the transfer only.

The administrative judiciary must be independent and impartial. Since the administrative organs decide that the administrative and civil disputes are judicial acts, they need the independence of the awarding organs so as to ensure the impartiality of the award. In China, although the executive authorities have assumed a large number of judicial functions, but basically there is no independence, no difference with the general administrative organs. This is very difficult to guarantee the fairness of its ruling, and it is also the key factor restricting the healthy development of the administrative adjudication system.

Administrative judicial power should be relatively centralized and unified. Authority, professional, fair, fast, cheap is the life of the administrative justice system. To achieve the above objectives, we need to work to solve the problem of the administrative division of justice is too scattered. This means that citizens will be provided with a unified and comprehensive administrative judicial system, and citizens can easily apply for relief. The relative concentration of administrative judicial power can not only provide centralized and unified referee service for the parties, but also enhance the ability of defense administrative organs to intervene and improve the efficiency of judicial resources.

想要了解更多英国留学资讯或者需要留学生作业辅导，请关注51Due英国论文代写平台，51Due是一家专业的论文代写机构，专业辅导海外留学生的英文论文写作，主要业务有医学Essay代写、Essay代写、paper代写、assignment代写、英国工科毕业论文代写。在这里，51Due致力于为留学生朋友提供高效优质的留学教育辅导服务，为广大留学生提升写作水平，帮助他们达成学业目标。如果您有论文代写需求，可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。