>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Reply of the Supreme People's Court on Issues concerning Whether the Acceptance Inspection Report on Elevators Issued by a Special Equipment Supervision and Inspection Authority Is an Actionable Administrative Act [Effective]
最高人民法院关于特种设备监督检验所出具的《电梯验收检验报告》是否属于可诉行政行为问题的答复 [现行有效]
【法宝引证码】

 

Reply of the Supreme People's Court on Issues concerning Whether the Acceptance Inspection Report on Elevators Issued by a Special Equipment Supervision and Inspection Authority Is an Actionable Administrative Act

 

最高人民法院关于特种设备监督检验所出具的《电梯验收检验报告》是否属于可诉行政行为问题的答复

(No. 100 [2011] of the Supreme People's Court) ([2011]行他字第100号)

The Higher People's Court of Hubei Province: 湖北省高级人民法院:
Your Request for Instructions on Whether the Acceptance Inspection Report on Elevators Issued by a Special Equipment Supervision and Inspection Authority Is an Actionable Administrative Act (No. 2 [2010], HPC, Hubei) has been received. Upon deliberation, the following reply is herby made: 你院[2010]鄂行他字第2号《关于特种设备监督检验机构出具<电梯验收检验报告>是否属于可诉行政行为的请示》收悉。经研究,答复如下:
In accordance with the provisions of item (4) of Article 12 and paragraph 2 of Article 39 of the Administrative Licensing Law of the People's Republic of China, it seems that the Acceptance Inspection Report on Elevators that is issued by a special equipment inspection authority after it conducts inspection and testing on elevators can be treated as an administrative licensing act; however, you shall correctly determine whether Kenyes International Property (Wuhan) Limited is qualified as plaintiff of the case upon further deliberation. 根据《中华人民共和国行政许可法》第十二条第(四)项、第三十九条第二款的规定,特种设备检验机构对电梯实施检验检测后出具的《电梯验收检验报告》,似可作为行政许可行为对待。但凯恩斯国际置业(武汉)有限公司是否具有本案原告资格,请你院进一步研究后作出正确认定。
June 5, 2012 此复。

 二○一二年六月五日
 附:
 湖南省高级人民法院关于特种设备监督检验机构出具《电梯验收检验报告》是否属于可诉行政行为的请示
 ([2010]鄂行他字第2号)
 最高人民法院:
 武汉市中级人民法院受理的上诉人凯恩斯国际置业(武汉)有限公司诉武汉市特种设备监督检验所出具《电梯验收检验检测报告》行为上诉一案,因涉及《电梯验收检验检测报告》可诉性问题,向我院请示,我院审判委员会在讨论中产生不同意见,提出如下请示:
   一、当事人基本情况
 上诉人(原审原告):凯恩斯国际置业(武汉)有限公司(下称凯恩斯公司)。
 法定代表人:陈新林,董事长。
 被上诉人(原审被告):武汉市特种设备监督检验所(下称特检所)。
 法定代表人:邹少俊,所长。
   二、案件主要事实
 凯恩斯公司一审诉称:原告购买电梯的时间是2004年1月19日,被告检验时间是2006年,应当适用新的GB7588-2003《电梯制造与安装安全规范》,不能适用GB7588-1995国家标准。根据GB7588-2003标准,电梯应当安装三方通话功能和电脑监视屏才能合格,而当时检验合格时电梯并不具备上述功能。且特检所出具的《电梯验收检验报告》对同一批次的30部电梯检验适用两个不同的标准违法。请求撤销特检所出具的《电梯验收检验报告》。
......
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese