| Notice of the Supreme People's Court on Issuing the Ninth Group of Guiding Cases | | 最高人民法院关于发布第九批指导性案例的通知 |
| (No. 337 [2014] of the Supreme People's Court) | | （法〔2014〕337号） |
| The higher people's courts of all provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government; the Military Court of the People's Liberation Army; and the Production and Construction Corps Branch of the Higher People's Court of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region: | | 各省、自治区、直辖市高级人民法院，解放军军事法院，新疆维吾尔自治区高级人民法院生产建设兵团分院： |
| In accordance with the provisions of Article 9 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Case Guidance, the Supreme People's Court has compiled cases published on the Gazette of the Supreme People's Court that have guiding significance in the work of adjudication and enforcement for courts over the country. Upon deliberation and decision of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court, the case of Tian Yong v. University of Science and Technology Beijing regarding refusal to issue graduation certificate and degree certificate and other six cases (Guiding Cases No. 38-44) are hereby issued as the ninth group of guiding cases for references in trial of similar cases. | | 根据《最高人民法院关于案例指导工作的规定》第九条的规定，最高人民法院对《最高人民法院公报》刊发的对全国法院审判、执行工作具有指导意义的案例，进行了编纂。经最高人民法院审判委员会讨论决定，现将田永诉北京科技大学拒绝颁发毕业证、学位证案等七个案例（指导案例38-44号），作为第九批指导性案例发布，供在审判类似案件时参照。 |
| Supreme People's Court | | 最高人民法院 |
| December 24, 2014 | | 2014年12月24日 |
| Guiding Case No. 38 | | 指导案例38号 |
| Tian Yong v. University of Science and Technology Beijing (a case regarding refusal to issue graduation certificate and degree certificate) | | 田永诉北京科技大学拒绝颁发毕业证、学位证案 |
| (Issued on December 25, 2014 as adopted by the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court) | | （最高人民法院审判委员会讨论通过 2014年12月25日发布） |
| Keywords: administrative litigation; issuance of certificates; institution of higher education; scope of case acceptance; due process | | 关键词 行政诉讼 颁发证书 高等学校 受案范围 正当程序 |
| Key Points of Judgment | | 裁判要点 |
| 1. Where an institution of higher education refuses to issue the academic certificate or degree certificate to an educatee who has violated the school rules and disciplines and the educatee raises an objection thereto, the educatee may file an administrative litigation according to the law. | | 1.高等学校对受教育者因违反校规、校纪而拒绝颁发学历证书、学位证书，受教育者不服的，可以依法提起行政诉讼。 |
| 2. Where an institution of higher education makes a decision on ordering an educatee to leave school in accordance with school rules and disciplines that violate the laws, administrative regulations, or rules of the State, the people's court may not affirm such decision. | | 2.高等学校依据违背国家法律、行政法规或规章的校规、校纪，对受教育者作出退学处理等决定的，人民法院不予支持。 |
| 3. When an institution of higher education makes a decision against an educatee who has violated school rules and disciplines and the decision affects the basic rights of the educatee, the institution of higher education shall permit the educatee to defend himself or herself and waste no time in serving the decision on the educatee after the decision is made; otherwise, it shall be regarded to have violated the statutory procedures. | | 3.高等学校对因违反校规、校纪的受教育者作出影响其基本权利的决定时，应当允许其申辩并在决定作出后及时送达，否则视为违反法定程序。 |
| Relevant Legal Provisions | | 相关法条 |
Article 25 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China | | 《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》第二十五条 |
Articles 21 and 22 of the Education Law of the People's Republic of China | | 《中华人民共和国教育法》第二十一条、第二十二条 |
Article 8 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees | | 《中华人民共和国学位条例》第八条 |
| Basic Facts | | 基本案情 |
| In September 1994, plaintiff, Tian Yong, was admitted to University of Science and Technology Beijing (“USTB”) and was registered in the school roll of undergraduates. On February 29, 1996, Tian Yong carried a scrip with electromagnetics formulas on it when attending a makeup examination on electromagnetics. When he went to the washroom in the middle of the examination, the scrip dropped out and was found by the invigilators. Although the invigilators did not identify that Tian Yong had the act of peeping at the scrip, they still immediately stopped Tian Yong from taking the examination according to examination room disciplines. In 1994, the defendant, USTB, formulated the Urgent Notice on Conducting Strict Examination Administration (No. 068 [1994], USTB) (hereinafter referred to as No. 068 Notice) in accordance with the spirit of the instructions of the former State Education Commission on strictly enforcing examination room disciplines. In accordance with No. 068 Notice, any student who has cheated in the examination shall leave school and be deregistered from the school roll. Based thereon, on March 5, 1996, the defendant determined that Tian Yong's act was cheating in an examination and made a decision that Tian Yong must leave school. On April 10 of the same year, the defendant filled out and issued a notice on change in the school roll; however, it failed to directly announce the decision on ordering Tian Yong to leave school or serve the notice on change in the school roll upon Tian Yong and failed to handle the formalities of Tian Yong's leaving school. Tian Yong continued to attend normal studies and activities organized by USTB with his identity as a student in USTB. In September 1996, the defendant reissued a student ID card to Tian Yong. In each academic year later, it accepted the education fee paid by Tian Yong, registered his name, granted undergraduate subsidies to him, and arranged him to attend the practical design for university graduates, with the completion fee for graduation design granted by it obtained by his supervising teacher of the thesis. Tian Yong also attended examinations in the name of a student in USTB and successively obtained the qualification certificates of CET-4 and Basic Language in computer application proficiency test. The defendant admitted such facts that during the four years of study in USTB, the plaintiff's academic performance was qualified for all subjects, he passed the graduation practice, design and oral defense of his thesis, he was also awarded excellence in his graduation thesis, and his total academic performance ranked ninth among the whole class. | | 原告田永于1994年9月考取北京科技大学，取得本科生的学籍。1996年2月29日，田永在电磁学课程的补考过程中，随身携带写有电磁学公式的纸条。考试中，去上厕所时纸条掉出，被监考教师发现。监考教师虽未发现其有偷看纸条的行为，但还是按照考场纪律，当即停止了田永的考试。被告北京科技大学根据原国家教委关于严肃考场纪律的指示精神，于1994年制定了校发（94）第068号《关于严格考试管理的紧急通知》（简称第068号通知）。该通知规定，凡考试作弊的学生一律按退学处理，取消学籍。被告据此于1996年3月5日认定田永的行为属作弊行为，并作出退学处理决定。同年4月10日，被告填发了学籍变动通知，但退学处理决定和变更学籍的通知未直接向田永宣布、送达，也未给田永办理退学手续，田永继续以该校大学生的身份参加正常学习及学校组织的活动。1996年9月，被告为田永补办了学生证，之后每学年均收取田永交纳的教育费，并为田永进行注册、发放大学生补助津贴，安排田永参加了大学生毕业实习设计，由其论文指导教师领取了学校发放的毕业设计结业费。田永还以该校大学生的名义参加考试，先后取得了大学英语四级、计算机应用水平测试BASIC语言成绩合格证书。被告对原告在该校的四年学习中成绩全部合格，通过毕业实习、毕业设计及论文答辩，获得优秀毕业论文及毕业总成绩为全班第九名的事实无争议。 |
| In June 1998, when the college and department where Tian Yong studied submitted to the defendant the form for conferring the bachelor's degree on Tian Yong's class, the relevant department of the defendant refused to issue the graduation certificate to Tian Yong on the ground that Tian Yong has been ordered to leave school and did not have his name in the school roll of USTB, nor did it submit the qualification form for graduation dispatch to the administrative department of education. The college and department where Tian Yong studied held that the plaintiff met the requirements for university graduation and was qualified to be conferred the bachelor's degree. As the plaintiff was negotiating with USTB on the issue of his graduation at that time, the college and department did not sign on the form for conferring the bachelor's degree temporarily and were to sign it after the issue of the plaintiff's name in the school roll has been settled. Therefore, the defendant did not put plaintiff's name into the name list of students with qualification for the conferment of the bachelor's degree and submit it to the Academic Degree Evaluation Committee of USTB for approval. Some teachers in USTB have petitioned to the former State Education Commission for the matter of Tian Yong's name in the school roll. On May 18, 1998, the Department for Students in Institutions of Higher Education of the former State Education Commission sent a letter to the defendant, holding that the defendant's disciplinary measure against Tian Yong for his violation of the examination room disciplines was too severe, and suggested a second check on the matter. On June 10 of the same year, the defendant still insisted on the original conclusion after the second check. Tian Yong filed an administrative litigation in the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing Municipality, claiming that he has met the legal requirements to be a university graduate and it was illegal for USTB to refuse to issue graduation certificate and degree certificate to him. | | 1998年6月，田永所在院系向被告报送田永所在班级授予学士学位表时，被告有关部门以田永已按退学处理、不具备北京科技大学学籍为由，拒绝为其颁发毕业证书，进而未向教育行政部门呈报田永的毕业派遣资格表。田永所在院系认为原告符合大学毕业和授予学士学位的条件，但由于当时原告因毕业问题正在与学校交涉，故暂时未在授予学位表中签字，待学籍问题解决后再签。被告因此未将原告列入授予学士学位资格的名单交该校学位评定委员会审核。因被告的部分教师为田永一事向原国家教委申诉，国家教委高校学生司于1998年5月18日致函被告，认为被告对田永违反考场纪律一事处理过重，建议复查。同年6月10日，被告复查后，仍然坚持原结论。田永认为自己符合大学毕业生的法定条件，北京科技大学拒绝给其颁发毕业证、学位证是违法的，遂向北京市海淀区人民法院提起行政诉讼。 |
| Judgment | | 裁判结果 |
| On February 14, 1999, the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing Municipality rendered the following administrative judgment (No. 00142 [1998], First, Administrative Division, Haidian): | | 北京市海淀区人民法院于1999年2月14日作出（1998）海行初字第00142号行政判决： |
| 1. USTB shall, within 30 days as of the date when this Judgment comes into force, issue the university graduation certificate to Tian Yong; | | 一、北京科技大学在本判决生效之日起30日内向田永颁发大学本科毕业证书； |
| 2. USTB shall, within 60 days as of the date when this Judgment comes into force, organize the relevant college and department and its Academic Degree Evaluation Committee to examine Tian Yong's qualification for the bachelor's degree; | | 二、北京科技大学在本判决生效之日起60日内组织本校有关院、系及学位评定委员会对田永的学士学位资格进行审核； |
| 3. USTB shall, within 30 days as of the date when this Judgment comes into force, perform the duty of reporting the relevant formalities of the graduation dispatch of Tian Yong to the local administrative department of education; and | | 三、北京科技大学于本判决生效后30日内履行向当地教育行政部门上报有关田永毕业派遣的有关手续的职责； |
| 4. Tian Yong's other claims shall be dismissed. After this Judgment was pronounced, USTB appealed. On April 26, 1999, the No. 1 Intermediate People's Court of Beijing Municipality rendered an administrative judgment (No. 73 [1999], Final, Administrative Division, No. 1 IPC, Beijing) to dismiss the appeal and affirm the original judgment. | | 四、驳回田永的其他诉讼请求。北京科技大学提出上诉，北京市第一中级人民法院于1999年4月26日作出（1999）一中行终字第73号行政判决：驳回上诉，维持原判。 |
| Judgment's Reasoning | | 裁判理由 |
| In the effective judgment, the court held that: In accordance with the laws and regulations of China, an institution of higher education has the authority to conduct school roll administration, grant awards, or impose sanction on educatees and has the functions of issuing academic certificates and degree certificates to educatees on behalf of the State. The relationship between an institution of higher education and an educatee is educational administration. Where the educatee raises an objection to the administrative behavior of the institution of higher education involving the basic rights of the educatee, the educatee has the right to file an administrative litigation and the institution of higher education is the eligible defendant in the administrative litigation. | | 法院生效裁判认为：根据我国法律、法规规定，高等学校对受教育者有进行学籍管理、奖励或处分的权力，有代表国家对受教育者颁发学历证书、学位证书的职责。高等学校与受教育者之间属于教育行政管理关系，受教育者对高等学校涉及受教育者基本权利的管理行为不服的，有权提起行政诉讼，高等学校是行政诉讼的适格被告。 |
| An institution of higher education has corresponding education autonomy according to the law, has the right to formulate school disciplines and rules, and has the right to conduct teaching administration and impose sanction on students for their violation of disciplines; however, the school disciplines and rules it has formulated and the teaching administration and punishment imposed on students for their violation of disciplines based thereon must comply with laws, regulations, and rules and must respect and protect the lawful rights and interests of the parties. In this case, the plaintiff's act of carrying a scrip in the make-up examination was a violation of examination room disciplines and the defendant may impose sanction on the plaintiff in accordance with the relevant laws, regulations, rules and the relevant provisions of USTB; however, the defendant made a decision on ordering the plaintiff to leave school in accordance with No. 068 Notice as formulated by USTB, which was contrary to the statutory conditions for leaving school as prescribed in Article 29 of the Provisions on the Administration of Students in Regular Institutions of Higher Education. Therefore, it was illegal for the defendant to make the decision on ordering the plaintiff to leave school. | | 高等学校依法具有相应的教育自主权，有权制定校纪、校规，并有权对在校学生进行教学管理和违纪处分，但是其制定的校纪、校规和据此进行的教学管理和违纪处分，必须符合法律、法规和规章的规定，必须尊重和保护当事人的合法权益。本案原告在补考中随身携带纸条的行为属于违反考场纪律的行为，被告可以按照有关法律、法规、规章及学校的有关规定处理，但其对原告作出退学处理决定所依据的该校制定的第068号通知，与《普通高等学校学生管理规定》第二十九条规定的法定退学条件相抵触，故被告所作退学处理决定违法。 |
| The decision on ordering the plaintiff to leave school involved the plaintiff's right of being educated. In order to fully guarantee the rights and interests of the party concerned, the defendant should serve and declare the decision upon the party concerned and should permit the party concerned to propose defending opinions on the basis of the principle of due process; however, the defendant did not handle the matter in compliance with this principle, nor did it actually handle the formalities of deregistering the plaintiff's name from the school roll and rearranging his residential registration or personal file. In September 1996 when the plaintiff lost his student card, the defendant reissued a new one to the plaintiff and registered his name. This factual behavior should be deemed as the defendant having modified the original decision on ordering the plaintiff to leave school and resumed the plaintiff's name in the school roll. Moreover, under the arrangements of the defendant, the plaintiff completed four years of courses in USTB, attended appraisal, practice and graduation design, and passed the oral defense of his thesis. Although the aforesaid acts were committed by the defendant and some teachers of the college and department where the plaintiff studied, they were the exercise of functions and powers. Therefore, the defendant should bear the legal consequence arising from the aforesaid acts. | | 退学处理决定涉及原告的受教育权利，为充分保障当事人权益，从正当程序原则出发，被告应将此决定向当事人送达、宣布，允许当事人提出申辩意见。而被告既未依此原则处理，也未实际给原告办理注销学籍、迁移户籍、档案等手续。被告于1996年9月为原告补办学生证并注册的事实行为，应视为被告改变了对原告所作的按退学处理的决定，恢复了原告的学籍。被告又安排原告修满四年学业，参加考核、实习及毕业设计并通过论文答辩等。上述一系列行为虽系被告及其所属院系的部分教师具体实施，但因他们均属职务行为，故被告应承担上述行为所产生的法律后果。 |
| The State applies a system of academic certificates. As an institution of higher education established upon approval of the State, the defendant should issue corresponding education certificates to an educatee who had his or her name in the school roll, finished the regular education and study, reached the corresponding level, and met the corresponding requirements so as to acknowledge the corresponding education background that the educatee had. The plaintiff satisfied the aforesaid requirements for graduates of institutions of higher education. The defendant should, in accordance with the provisions of item (5), paragraph 1 of Article 28 of the Education Law of the People's Republic of China and Article 35 of the Provisions on the Administration of Students in Regular Institutions of Higher Education, issue the university graduation certificate to the plaintiff. | | 国家实行学历证书制度，被告作为国家批准设立的高等学校，对取得普通高等学校学籍、接受正规教育、学习结束达到一定水平和要求的受教育者，应当为其颁发相应的学业证明，以承认该学生具有的相当学历。原告符合上述高等学校毕业生的条件，被告应当依《中华人民共和国教育法》第二十八条第一款第五项及《普通高等学校学生管理规定》第三十五条的规定，为原告颁发大学本科毕业证书。 |
| The State applies a system of academic degree. The degree certificate is a measure for evaluating an individual's academic level. As an institution of higher education authorized by the State to confer the bachelor's degree, the defendant should, by following the statutory procedures, confer persons who have reached a certain academic level or professional technology level the corresponding academic degrees and issue degree certificates to them. In accordance with the requirements of statutory procedures for issuing a certificate of the bachelor's degree as prescribed in Article 4, Article 5, and item (3) of Article 18 of the Interim Measures for the Implementation of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees, the defendant should first organize the relevant college and department to examine the plaintiff's graduation academic performance, graduation appraisal, and other documents, so as to determine whether the plaintiff has mastered basic theories, professional knowledge, and basic skills of the subject and whether the plaintiff has possessed the preliminary capabilities of engaging in scientific researches or undertaking special technical work; and then decide whether it would nominate the plaintiff to be listed in recipients of the bachelor's degree to the Academic Degree Evaluation Committee. After the Academic Degree Evaluation Committee examined the list, the defendant should confer the bachelor's degree to the plaintiff. | | 国家实行学位制度，学位证书是评价个人学术水平的尺度。被告作为国家授权的高等学校学士学位授予机构，应依法定程序对达到一定学术水平或专业技术水平的人员授予相应的学位，颁发学位证书。依《中华人民共和国学位条例暂行实施办法》第四条、第五条、第十八条第三项规定的颁发学士学位证书的法定程序要求，被告首先应组织有关院系审核原告的毕业成绩和毕业鉴定等材料，确定原告是否已较好地掌握本门学科的基础理论、专业知识和基本技能，是否具备从事科学研究工作或担负专门技术工作的初步能力；再决定是否向学位评定委员会提名列入学士学位获得者的名单，学位评定委员会方可依名单审查通过后，由被告对原告授予学士学位。 |
| Guiding Case No. 39 | | 指导案例39号 |
| He Xiaoqiang v. Huazhong University of Science and Technology (a case regarding refusal to confer an academic degree) | | 何小强诉华中科技大学拒绝授予学位案 |
| (Issued on December 25 as adopted by the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court) | | （最高人民法院审判委员会讨论通过 2014年12月25日发布） |
| Keywords: administrative litigation; degree conferment; institution of higher education; academic autonomy | | 关键词 行政诉讼 学位授予 高等学校 学术自治 |
| Key Points of Judgment | | 裁判要点 |
| 1. An institution of higher education that has the authority to confer academic degrees shall be entitled to examine the application of a degree applicant for conferring an academic degree and decide whether to confer the academic degree on the applicant. Where the applicant files an administrative litigation against the institution of higher education for its decision of not conferring an academic degree on him or her, the people's court shall accept the lawsuit according to law. | | 1.具有学位授予权的高等学校，有权对学位申请人提出的学位授予申请进行审查并决定是否授予其学位。申请人对高等学校不授予其学位的决定不服提起行政诉讼的，人民法院应当依法受理。 |
| 2. The people's court shall support the academic standards for the conferment of an academic degree that is set by an institution of higher education within the scope of academic autonomy in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Interim Measures for the Implementation of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees and the decision on whether to confer the academic degree made by the institution of higher education on the basis of such academic standards. | | 2.高等学校依照《中华人民共和国学位条例暂行实施办法》的有关规定，在学术自治范围内制定的授予学位的学术水平标准，以及据此标准作出的是否授予学位的决定，人民法院应予支持。 |
| Relevant Legal Provisions | | 相关法条 |
| 1. Article 4 and paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees | | 1.《中华人民共和国学位条例》第四条、第八条第一款 |
| 2. Article 25 of the Interim Measures for the Implementation of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees | | 2.《中华人民共和国学位条例暂行实施办法》第二十五条 |
| Basic Facts | | 基本案情 |
| Plaintiff, He Xiaoqiang, was an undergraduate (being admitted in 2003) majoring in communication engineering in the third party, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST), Wuchang Branch (hereinafter referred to as “Wuchang Branch”). Wuchang Branch was an independent public institution as a legal person without the qualification of conferring bachelor's degrees. In accordance with the relevant State provisions on the conferment of bachelor's degrees and the agreement between both parties, the defendant, HUST, consented to confer bachelor's degrees to undergraduates of Wuchang Branch who met the requirements for the conferment of bachelor's degrees and the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Conferment of Bachelor's Degrees to Undergraduates of HUST, Wuchang Branch were annexed to the agreement. Article 2 of the Detailed Rules provides that “any undergraduate with his or her name in the school roll of HUST, Wuchang Branch who meets the requirements for the conferment of academic degrees in the Detailed Rules may apply for the conferment of the bachelor's degree to the Academic Degree Evaluation Committee of HUST” and Article 3 thereof provides that “… any one who reaches the following level or meets the following requirements, and passes the review of the Academic Evaluation Committee may be conferred the bachelor's degree…. (3) he or she passes the national examination of CET-4.” In December 2006, HUST formulated the Provisions on the Application for Bachelor's Degrees in Wuchang Branch and Wenhua College, which provided that passing the national examination of CET-4 was one of essential conditions for non-English majors to apply for bachelor's degrees. | | 原告何小强系第三人华中科技大学武昌分校（以下简称武昌分校）2003级通信工程专业的本科毕业生。武昌分校是独立的事业单位法人，无学士学位授予资格。根据国家对民办高校学士学位授予的相关规定和双方协议约定，被告华中科技大学同意对武昌分校符合学士学位条件的本科毕业生授予学士学位，并在协议附件载明《华中科技大学武昌分校授予本科毕业生学士学位实施细则》。其中第二条规定“凡具有我校学籍的本科毕业生，符合本《实施细则》中授予条件者，均可向华中科技大学学位评定委员会申请授予学士学位”，第三条规定“……达到下述水平和要求，经学术评定委员会审核通过者，可授予学士学位。……（三）通过全国大学英语四级统考”。 2006年12月，华中科技大学作出《关于武昌分校、文华学院申请学士学位的规定》，规定通过全国大学外语四级考试是非外国语专业学生申请学士学位的必备条件之一。 |
| On June 30, 2007, He Xiaoqiang obtained the Certificate of Graduation from Regular Institutions of Higher Education issued by Wuchang Branch. Since He Xiaoqiang did not pass the national examination of CET-4 during his undergraduate study, Wuchang Branch did not recommend him to HUST for applying for the bachelor's degree in accordance with the aforesaid Detailed Rules. On August 26 of the same year, He Xiaoqiang applied for the conferment of the Bachelor's Degree in Engineering to HUST and Wuchang Branch. On May 21, 2008, Wuchang Branch issued a written reply to He Xiaoqiang that since he did not pass the national examination of CET-4 and did not meet the requirements for the conferment of a bachelor's degree, HUST could not confer the bachelor's degree on him. | | 2007年6月30日，何小强获得武昌分校颁发的《普通高等学校毕业证书》，由于其本科学习期间未通过全国英语四级考试，武昌分校根据上述《实施细则》，未向华中科技大学推荐其申请学士学位。8月26日，何小强向华中科技大学和武昌分校提出授予工学学士学位的申请。2008年5月21日，武昌分校作出书面答复，因何小强没有通过全国大学英语四级考试，不符合授予条件，华中科技大学不能授予其学士学位。 |
| Judgment | | 裁判结果 |
| On December 18, 2008, the People's Court of Hongshan District, Wuhan City, Hubei Province rendered an administrative judgment (No. 81 [2008], First, Administrative Division, Hongshan) to dismiss the claim of plaintiff, He Xiaoqiang, that defendant, HUST, should confer the Bachelor's Degree in Engineering on him. On May 31, 2009, the Intermediate People's Court of Wuhan City, Hubei Province rendered an administrative judgment (No. 61 [2009], Final, Administrative Division, Wuhan) that the appeal should be dismissed and the original judgment should be affirmed. | | 湖北省武汉市洪山区人民法院于2008年12月18日作出（2008）洪行初字第81号行政判决，驳回原告何小强要求被告华中科技大学为其颁发工学学士学位的诉讼请求。湖北省武汉市中级人民法院于2009年5月31日作出（2009）武行终字第61号行政判决，驳回上诉，维持原判。 |
| Judgment's Reasoning | | 裁判理由 |
| In the effective judgment, the court held that: The main issues of this case were whether the administrative action alleged was actionable, whether the administrative action alleged was legitimate, and what the scope of judicial review was. | | 法院生效裁判认为：本案争议焦点主要涉及被诉行政行为是否可诉、是否合法以及司法审查的范围问题。 |
| First, as to the issue of whether the administrative action alleged was actionable, according to the authorization of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees and other relevant laws and administrative regulations, the defendant, HUST had the statutory authority to review and confer bachelor's degrees in regular institutions of higher education. Paragraph 2 of Article 4 of the Interim Measures for the Implementation of Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees provides that “in an institution of higher education that is incapable of conferring any bachelor's degree, the departments thereof shall submit a name list of undergraduates that reach the academic level of bachelors to the institution of higher education and upon approval of the institution of higher education, the institution of higher education shall recommend such undergraduates to an institution of higher education of the system or in the neighborhood that is capable of conferring bachelor's degrees. Where the relevant department of the institution of higher education that is capable of conferring bachelor's degrees holds upon examination and verification that the undergraduates recommended by the institution of higher education that is incapable of conferring bachelor's degrees comply with the Interim Measures and other relevant provisions, the relevant department may nominate such undergraduates to the academic degree evaluation committee of the institution of higher education that is capable of conferring bachelor's degrees and include them in the name list of recipients of bachelor's degrees.” In accordance with the aforesaid provisions and other relevant provisions of national policies for encouraging private colleges and universities to run schools, HUST had the right to confer bachelor's degrees in regular institutions of higher education on undergraduates of private colleges and universities who met the requirements of HUST for the conferment of bachelor's degrees upon examination in accordance with the agreement between it and Wuchang Branch. | | 一、被诉行政行为具有可诉性。根据《中华人民共和国学位条例》等法律、行政法规的授权，被告华中科技大学具有审查授予普通高校学士学位的法定职权。依据《中华人民共和国学位条例暂行实施办法》第四条第二款“非授予学士学位的高等院校，对达到学士学术水平的本科毕业生，应当由系向学校提出名单，经学校同意后，由学校就近向本系统、本地区的授予学士学位的高等院校推荐。授予学士学位的高等院校有关的系，对非授予学士学位的高等院校推荐的本科毕业生进行审查考核，认为符合本暂行办法及有关规定的，可向学校学位评定委员会提名，列入学士学位获得者名单”，以及国家促进民办高校办学政策的相关规定，华中科技大学有权按照与民办高校的协议，对于符合本校学士学位授予条件的民办高校本科毕业生经审查合格授予普通高校学士学位。 |
| In this case, the third party, Wuchang Branch, was a private college that did not obtain the qualification of conferring bachelor's degrees. According to the agreement between it and HUST, Wuchang Branch would recommend its undergraduates that reached the academic level of bachelors to HUST and HUST would decide whether to confer bachelor's degrees on them or not upon review. In accordance with the Interim Measures for the Implementation of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees and the agreement on cooperation in running school between HUST and Wuchang Branch, HUST had the statutory duty to review fresh undergraduates recommended by Wuchang Branch and decide whether to confer bachelor's degrees on them. He Xiaoqiang, an undergraduate of Wuchang Branch, filed an administrative lawsuit in the people's court on the ground that HUST failed to confer the Bachelor's Degree in Engineering on him within 60 days as of receipt of his application, which complied with the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 39 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Implementation of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China. Therefore, HUST was an eligible defendant in this case. Where He Xiaoqiang filed a lawsuit against HUST for HUST's failure to confer the bachelor's degree on him, the people's court should accept the lawsuit according to law. | | 本案中，第三人武昌分校是未取得学士学位授予资格的民办高校，该院校与华中科技大学签订合作办学协议约定，武昌分校对该校达到学士学术水平的本科毕业生，向华中科技大学推荐，由华中科技大学审核是否授予学士学位。依据《中华人民共和国学位条例暂行实施办法》的规定和华中科技大学与武昌分校之间合作办学协议，华中科技大学具有对武昌分校推荐的应届本科毕业生进行审查和决定是否颁发学士学位的法定职责。武昌分校的本科毕业生何小强以华中科技大学在收到申请之日起六十日内未授予其工学学士学位，向人民法院提起行政诉讼，符合《最高人民法院关于执行〈中华人民共和国行政诉讼法〉若干问题的解释》第三十九条第一款的规定。因此，华中科技大学是本案适格的被告，何小强对华中科技大学不授予其学士学位不服提起诉讼的，人民法院应当依法受理。 |
| Second, the provisions of Article 3 of the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Conferment of Bachelor's Degrees on Undergraduates of HUST, Wuchang Branch complied with the provisions of the superordinate law. Article 4 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees provides that “a bachelor's degree shall be conferred on an undergraduate from an institution of higher education who has good academic records and has attained the following academic standards: (1) having a relatively good grasp of basic theories, specialized knowledge, and basic skills….” Article 25 of the Interim Measures for the Implementation of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees provides that “an academic degree-conferring entity may formulate its detailed rules for the conferment of academic degrees in accordance with the Interim Measures.” The Interim Measures empowered an academic degree-conferring entity with the authority and duty of setting standards for conferring bachelor's degrees within the scope of academic autonomy on the basis of not violating the basic principles for conferring bachelor's degrees as prescribed in the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees. HUST connected the examination scores of CET-4 with the conferment of bachelor's degrees within the scope of authorization, which fell into the scope of academic autonomy. The exercise of teaching autonomy according to law and the issuance of specific provisions and requirements for the education quality and academic standards of undergraduates by an institution of higher education were elaborated standards for the conferment of bachelor's degrees and did not violate the principle-based provisions of Article 4 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees and Article 25 of the Interim Measures for the Implementation of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees. Therefore, He Xiaoqiang's failure to pass the CET-4 did not meet the requirements of HUST for the conferment of bachelor's degrees and Wuchang Branch did not recommend him to HUST to apply for the conferment of the bachelor's degree. Therefore, there was no fact that HUST committed nonfeasance and the claim of He Xiaoqiang should not be supported. | | 二、被告制定的《华中科技大学武昌分校授予本科毕业生学士学位实施细则》第三条的规定符合上位法规定。《中华人民共和国学位条例》第四条规定：“高等学校本科毕业生，成绩优良，达到下述学术水平者，授予学士学位：（一）较好地掌握本门学科的基础理论、专门知识和基本技能……”。《中华人民共和国学位条例暂行实施办法》第二十五条规定：“学位授予单位可根据本暂行条例实施办法，制定本单位授予学位的工作细则。”该办法赋予学位授予单位在不违反《中华人民共和国学位条例》所规定授予学士学位基本原则的基础上，在学术自治范围内制定学士学位授予标准的权力和职责，华中科技大学在此授权范围内将全国大学英语四级考试成绩与学士学位挂钩，属于学术自治的范畴。高等学校依法行使教学自主权，自行对其所培养的本科生教育质量和学术水平作出具体的规定和要求，是对授予学士学位的标准的细化，并没有违反《中华人民共和国学位条例》第四条和《中华人民共和国学位条例暂行实施办法》第二十五条的原则性规定。因此，何小强因未通过全国大学英语四级考试不符合华中科技大学学士学位的授予条件，武昌分校未向华中科技大学推荐其申请授予学士学位，故华中科技大学并不存在不作为的事实，对何小强的诉讼请求不予支持。 |
Third, the judicial review on an institution of higher education's conferment of academic degrees followed the principle of legality review. All institutions of higher education determined their respective standards for measuring academic levels for the conferment of bachelor's degrees according to their respective teaching levels and actual circumstances within the scope of statutory basic principles, which were the specific reflection of the principle of academic autonomy in the process of running institutions of higher education. Provided that the conditions for conferment of academic degrees complied with the provisions of laws and regulations, all institutions of higher education should decide whether to set higher academic standards for the conferment of bachelor's degrees or to duly lower the academic standards for the conferment of bachelor's degrees on the basis of their respective philosophy of schooling, actual teaching circumstances, and ideal academic level pursuit. The judicial review on the conferment of bachelor's degrees should not interfere with or affect the principle of academic autonomy for institutions of higher education and the scope of judicial review on administrative litigations regarding the conferment of academic degrees should follow the basic principle of legality review.
．．．．．． | | 三、对学校授予学位行为的司法审查以合法性审查为原则。各高等学校根据自身的教学水平和实际情况在法定的基本原则范围内确定各自学士学位授予的学术水平衡量标准，是学术自治原则在高等学校办学过程中的具体体现。在符合法律法规规定的学位授予条件前提下，确定较高的学士学位授予学术标准或适当放宽学士学位授予学术标准，均应由各高等学校根据各自的办学理念、教学实际情况和对学术水平的理想追求自行决定。对学士学位授予的司法审查不能干涉和影响高等学校的学术自治原则，学位授予类行政诉讼案件司法审查的范围应当以合法性审查为基本原则。
．．．．．． |
|
Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.
1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.
2. Binding to the account with access to this database.
3. Apply for a trial account.
4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【￥1900.00】 for your single purchase. | |
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
|
| | | |
| | | |