Resolution of Disputes on Urban Space

Research Project

Project/Area Number	17530031
Research Category	Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
Allocation Type	Single-year Grants
Section	一般
Research Field	Public law
Research Institution	Ritsumeikan University
Principal Investigator	YASUMOTO Norio Ritsumeikan University, Faculty of Law, Professor, 法学部, 教授 (20066723)
Project Period (FY)	2005 – 2006
Project Status	Completed (Fiscal Year 2006)
Budget Amount *help	¥1,300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,300,000) Fiscal Year 2006: ¥500,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000) Fiscal Year 2005: ¥800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000)
Keywords	down-zoning / administrative discretion / urban space / 法令適用基準時 / 都市空間 / 行政訴訟 / 住民訴訟 / 行政訴訟制度 / 紛争 / 行政裁量論 / ダウンサイジング / 多数当事者間訴訟
Research Abstract	Japanese social structure is now confronted with fundamental changes, some of which are a decrease in population and an aging society. Under this situation, 'Compact City' policy are becoming advocated. Down-Zoning is the main method for it. But it bring about new disputes. Each down-zoning must have its own justification. The doctrine for control of administrative discretion is needed for that purpose. The character of administrative discretion in planning is different from that in other administrative fields. But that doctrine has to be developed through clarifying and enriching points to be considered and methods for consideration. If down-zoning is implemented, many existing buildings become illegal inevitably. Under the Building Control Act of Japan, these 'illegal' buildings are allowed to exist until next repair or reconstruction. That is to say that they must the building completely legal at the time of repair or reconstruction. But there should be an appropriate allowance according to the type of buildings, the type of repair, the type of regulation. And the new system for reconstruction of condominiums is hoped to develop. Anyway a factor of 'time' must be incorporated into planning theory and administrative law theory. A factor of 'time' must be incorporated into the system of dispute resolution. Concerning to this point, there is one issue. On law at what time the second administrative decision should be based after the original decision was quashed by the judgment, at the time of original decision or at the time of second decision? I think it should be based on the law at the time of original decision as a general rule, but at the time of second decision according to the type of law. This issue has to be developed considering new remedies: mandamus. It is my continuing theme for research.