@article{oai:nagasaki-u.repo.nii.ac.jp:00010055,
 author = {海野, 敦史},
 issue = {1-2},
 journal = {経営と経済, Journal of Business and Economics},
 month = {Sep},
 note = {This paper attempts to interpret the range of“legal interests”stipulated
in article 36 of Japan's Administrative Case Litigation Act (hereafter“
act”)．It appears that there has not been much debate on the
substance of legal interests under article 36 of the act partly because
this article, associated with nullity declaration suit, is said to be one of
the most difficult provisions for legal interpretation. While it has generally
been accepted that the legal interests are the same as those stipulated
article 9 (paragraph 1) in relation to revocation suit, this idea does
not reflect the overall provisions of the act. On the basis of rigid interpretation
of the act, it would be fair to note that the person who has
legal interests under article 36 includes those who have got damage to
their constitutional fundamental rights by administrative measures having
substantial defect and those who have got serious damage to their
“consequential”legal interests (normally a direct addressee of an administrative
measure)．This interpretation stands out from the comparison
with the coverage of the person having legal interests under article
9 of the act, which has broader possibility to include those who
have legal rights or benefits to be damaged by administrative measures
without a“substantial”defect and those who have got“indifferent”
damage to their legal interests. Therefore, it is not appropriate to simply
assume the coverage of legal interests under article 36 to be the same as
that stipulated in article 9 of the act. The substantive difference between
revocable administrative measures and null administrative measures
lies behind this interpretation., 田口信夫、高倉泰夫、森永春乃先生 定年退職記念号, 經營と經濟, 91(1-2), pp.143-178; 2011},
 pages = {143--178},
 title = {無効等確認訴訟における「法律上の利益」の解釈論上の射程},
 volume = {91},
 year = {2011}
}