事實行為的行政訴訟

行政事實行為雖然不以發生法律效果為目的，但產生的事實上效果可能對私人造成不利，理應接受法的規範。與法律行為不同，行政事實行為不包含意思表示，並無公定力，要消除其不利後果，不需要藉由撤銷訴訟來實現，行政事實行為本身不可撤銷，也不必經由擬制為合成性行政決定或者經由結構解釋認定為形式性行政決定來撤銷。行政事實行為的救濟方法主要涉及救濟的時機和有效性問題。針對行政事實行為，可不受行政訴訟一般的起訴期限限制，只要存在確認利益，就可以提起確認之訴。在已有事實行為造成不利影響時，法院可以作出確認違法判決，有時還須責令行政機關採取補救措施，才能有效救濟。在行政事實行為尚未作出時，法院可以作出履行判決和給付判決，要求行政機關為或不為某種事實行為，以便滿足原告的權利需求或者預防對原告的不利。

Although administrative factual acts are not aimed at producing legal effects, their actual effects may disadvantage private individuals and should thus be subject to legal regulation. Unlike legal acts, administrative factual acts do not involve declarations of intent, nor do they carry public authority. To eliminate their adverse consequences, there is no need for annulment lawsuits, as administrative factual acts themselves are irrevocable. It is also unnecessary to treat them as composite administrative decisions through legal fiction or reinterpret them as formal administrative decisions for annulment purposes. Remedies for administrative factual acts mainly concern the timing and effectiveness of relief. These acts are not subject to the general statute of limitations for administrative litigation; as long as there is a legitimate interest in seeking confirmation, a confirmation action can be filed. When an existing factual act has caused adverse effects, the court can issue a ruling confirming its illegality and, in some cases, order the administrative body to take remedial measures for effective redress. If the factual act has not yet been carried out, the court may issue enforcement or payment orders, requiring the administrative body to perform or refrain from certain factual acts to meet the plaintiff􀆳s rights or prevent harm to them.