2015年5月1日，人民法院开始实行“立案登记制”改革，推开了法院的大门，敞开了司法之门，同时新《行政诉讼法》也开始施行，开启了我国行政审判的新纪元。本文研究的问题是，在行政诉讼立案登记制背景下，法院如何把好立案关？即从行政诉讼领域，展开规范的分析和实践的考察，探寻行政诉讼的立案规则，探讨立案登记制下的立案结构，尝试建构符合我国实际的立案登记制及其完善机制。首先，本文通过司法统计数据进行分析，发现了立案登记制实施效果显著，带来了行政诉讼案件的不断增长，但也产生了新的问题，仍然居高的“撤诉率”和不断高涨的“裁驳率”，某种程度上反映了行政案件的处理结果不佳，依旧程序空转严重，耗费了国家有限的司法资源，也不利于行政纠纷的实质性解决。为了改善现状，更好地实现立案登记制的改革初衷，回应新的挑战，需要建构行政诉讼立案登记制下的立案规则，理顺立案登记制与立案审查之间的关系。其次，通过规范梳理，厘清立案登记制下并非不审查，而是也要注意坚持适当地必要审查的原则。就立案的审查内容和审查程序，从诉状材料、受案范围、主体资格、管辖问题、原告证据、复议前置、起诉期限和重复起诉等立案要件进行分析。一方面，从法律制度的静态视角，结合相关法律法规确立的行政诉讼受理条件，梳理法院的立案规定；另一方面，从司法实践的动态视角，观察驳回起诉案件和不予立案案件，并以此作为探寻人民法院立案规则的切入点，提炼立案的司法智慧。另外，从域外的比较视角，考察英国司法审查申请制的历史沿革与具体规定，探知其内在原理，沟通英国司法审查申请制的准许机制与我国立案登记制下立案审查的相似性，思考英国经验的中国化启示。最后，在实证研究和理论分析的基础上，对立案登记制进行整体检视，从法院职权的视角，而非当事人的角度，正本清源澄清立案“两道门”的本来结构，为了落实立案登记制下必要的立案审查，适当控制立案的司法自由裁量，需要建构立案释明规则的内部规范体系，强化立案文书公开的外部监督，进而完善符合我国实际“有诉必理为本、适当审查为辅”的立案登记制。
On May 1, 2015, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) officially implemented the reform of the “case filing registration system”, that opened the door of the court, and the door to justice. Also, the newly modified Administrative Procedure Law has begun to take effect. This paper focuses on the normative interpretation and practical analysis from the field of administrative litigation. By exploring the implementation of the “case registration and filing system”, the paper tries to explore and improve the rules of the people's court.First of all, this paper finds, based on empirical analysis, that the implementation of registration system has a significant effect of prompting a continuous growth of administrative litigation cases. At the same time, it has also created new problems. The “withdrawal rate” and the “retroversion rate” are still high, with the latter even skyrocketing. It reflects that the administrative cases are not well handled, and the procedures are still idling. It is necessary to reconstruct the filing rules under the administrative litigation registration system.Secondly, it is clarified that the “case registration and filing system” is not out of the bounds of judicial review. The content of the review and the review process are analyzed on the bases of the content of the complaint, the scope of the case, the qualification of the subject, the issue of jurisdiction, the evidence of the plaintiff, the pre-review, the time limit for prosecution and the repeated prosecution.Finally, viewed from perspective of the court's power, rather than the perspective of the litigants, the register has the original “two doors” structure . In order to implement the case review under the “case registration and filing system”, it is necessary to control the judicial discretion of filing a case. The registration system for filing cases should be improved to “have the basis of litigation and supplemented by appropriate review” in accordance with the actual situations of China.
