2006 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
Resolution of Disputes on Urban Space
| 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
|
| Keywords | down-zoning / administrative discretion / urban space / 法令適用基準時 / 都市空間 |
|---|
| 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.
|
Research Products
(1 results)
