第八条処分の取消しの訴えは、当該処分につき法令の規定により審査請求をすることができる場合においても、直ちに提起することを妨げない。ただし、法律に当該処分についての審査請求に対する裁決を経た後でなければ処分の取消しの訴えを提起することができない旨の定めがあるときは、この限りでない。

Article 8(1)Even where a request for an administrative review of the original administrative disposition may be made pursuant to the provisions of laws and regulations, this does not preclude the immediate filing of an action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition; provided, however, that this does not apply if there are provisions in any law that no action for the revocation of an original administrative disposition may be filed until an administrative determination is made in response to a request for an administrative review of the original administrative disposition.

２前項ただし書の場合においても、次の各号の一に該当するときは、裁決を経ないで、処分の取消しの訴えを提起することができる。

(2)Even in the case referred to in the proviso to the preceding paragraph, if the case falls under any of the following items, an action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition may be filed without obtaining an administrative determination:

３第一項本文の場合において、当該処分につき審査請求がされているときは、裁判所は、その審査請求に対する裁決があるまで（審査請求があつた日から三箇月を経過しても裁決がないときは、その期間を経過するまで）、訴訟手続を中止することができる。

(3)In the case referred to in the main clause of paragraph (1), if a request for an administrative review of the original administrative disposition has already been made, the court may suspend litigation proceedings until an administrative determination is made in response to the request for the administrative review (in cases where no administrative determination is made after a period of three months has elapsed from the day on which the request for the administrative review was made, until that period expires).

第九条処分の取消しの訴え及び裁決の取消しの訴え（以下「取消訴訟」という。）は、当該処分又は裁決の取消しを求めるにつき法律上の利益を有する者（処分又は裁決の効果が期間の経過その他の理由によりなくなつた後においてもなお処分又は裁決の取消しによつて回復すべき法律上の利益を有する者を含む。）に限り、提起することができる。

Article 9(1)An action for the revocation of an original administrative disposition and an action for the revocation of an administrative determination (hereinafter referred to as "actions for the revocation of administrative dispositions") may be filed only by a person who has legal interest to seek the revocation of the original administrative disposition or of the administrative determination (including a person who has legal interest to be recovered by revoking the original administrative disposition or administrative determination even after it has lost its effect due to the expiration of a certain period or for other reasons).

２裁判所は、処分又は裁決の相手方以外の者について前項に規定する法律上の利益の有無を判断するに当たつては、当該処分又は裁決の根拠となる法令の規定の文言のみによることなく、当該法令の趣旨及び目的並びに当該処分において考慮されるべき利益の内容及び性質を考慮するものとする。この場合において、当該法令の趣旨及び目的を考慮するに当たつては、当該法令と目的を共通にする関係法令があるときはその趣旨及び目的をも参酌するものとし、当該利益の内容及び性質を考慮するに当たつては、当該処分又は裁決がその根拠となる法令に違反してされた場合に害されることとなる利益の内容及び性質並びにこれが害される態様及び程度をも勘案するものとする。

(2)When judging whether or not any person, other than the person to whom an original administrative disposition or administrative determination is addressed, has the legal interest prescribed in the preceding paragraph, the court is not to rely only on the language of the provisions of the laws and regulations which give a basis for the original administrative disposition or administrative determination, but is to consider the purport and objectives of the laws and regulations as well as the content and nature of the interest that should be taken into consideration in making the original administrative disposition.In this case, when considering the purport and objectives of those laws and regulations, the court is take into consideration the purport and objectives of any related laws and regulations which share the objective in common with those laws and regulations, and when considering the content and nature of that interest, the court is to take into consideration the content and nature of the interest that would be harmed if the original administrative disposition or administrative determination were made in violation of the laws and regulations which give a basis therefor, as well as in what manner and to what extent that interest would be harmed.

第十条取消訴訟においては、自己の法律上の利益に関係のない違法を理由として取消しを求めることができない。

Article 10(1)In an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition, the plaintiff may not seek revocation on the grounds of breach of law which is irrelevant to their interest.

２処分の取消しの訴えとその処分についての審査請求を棄却した裁決の取消しの訴えとを提起することができる場合には、裁決の取消しの訴えにおいては、処分の違法を理由として取消しを求めることができない。

(2)Where both an action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition and an action for the revocation of an administrative determination that has dismissed a request for an administrative review of the original administrative disposition may be filed, it may not be allowed to seek the revocation of the original administrative disposition on the grounds of illegality thereof in an action for the revocation of an administrative determination.

第十一条処分又は裁決をした行政庁（処分又は裁決があつた後に当該行政庁の権限が他の行政庁に承継されたときは、当該他の行政庁。以下同じ。）が国又は公共団体に所属する場合には、取消訴訟は、次の各号に掲げる訴えの区分に応じてそれぞれ当該各号に定める者を被告として提起しなければならない。

Article 11(1)Where an administrative authority that has made an original administrative disposition or administrative determination (in cases where the power of the administrative authority that made the original administrative disposition or administrative determination has later been succeeded to by another administrative authority, that other administrative authority; the same applies hereinafter) is affiliated with the State or a public entity, any action for the revocation of that administrative disposition must be filed against the person specified in each of the following items according to the categories of actions listed in the respective items:

２処分又は裁決をした行政庁が国又は公共団体に所属しない場合には、取消訴訟は、当該行政庁を被告として提起しなければならない。

(2)Where an administrative authority that has made the original administrative disposition or administrative determination is not affiliated with the State or any public entity, any action for the revocation of that administrative disposition must be filed against the administrative authority.

３前二項の規定により被告とすべき国若しくは公共団体又は行政庁がない場合には、取消訴訟は、当該処分又は裁決に係る事務の帰属する国又は公共団体を被告として提起しなければならない。

(3)Where neither the State nor any public entity or administrative authority can be identified as the party to be sued under the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, any action for the revocation of an administrative disposition must be filed against the State or public entity in which the affairs pertaining to the original administrative disposition or administrative determination are vested.

４第一項又は前項の規定により国又は公共団体を被告として取消訴訟を提起する場合には、訴状には、民事訴訟の例により記載すべき事項のほか、次の各号に掲げる訴えの区分に応じてそれぞれ当該各号に定める行政庁を記載するものとする。

(4)When filing an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition against the State or a public entity pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) or the preceding paragraph, the administrative authority specified in each of the following items according to the categories of actions listed in the respective items is to be stated in a complaint, in addition to the matters to be stated under the provisions on civil actions:

５第一項又は第三項の規定により国又は公共団体を被告として取消訴訟が提起された場合には、被告は、遅滞なく、裁判所に対し、前項各号に掲げる訴えの区分に応じてそれぞれ当該各号に定める行政庁を明らかにしなければならない。

(5)Where an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition is filed against the State or a public entity pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) or paragraph (3), the defendant must clearly indicate to the court, without delay, the administrative authority specified in each of the following items according to the categories of actions listed in the respective items.

６処分又は裁決をした行政庁は、当該処分又は裁決に係る第一項の規定による国又は公共団体を被告とする訴訟について、裁判上の一切の行為をする権限を有する。

(6)An administrative authority that has made an original administrative disposition or administrative determination has the power to conduct any and all acts in court in an action filed against the State or the public entity under the provisions of paragraph (1) with regard to the original administrative disposition or administrative determination.

第十二条取消訴訟は、被告の普通裁判籍の所在地を管轄する裁判所又は処分若しくは裁決をした行政庁の所在地を管轄する裁判所の管轄に属する。

Article 12(1)An action for the revocation of an administrative disposition is subject to the jurisdiction of the court that has jurisdiction over the location of the general venue of the defendant or the court that has jurisdiction over the location of the administrative authority that has made the original administrative disposition or administrative determination.

２土地の収用、鉱業権の設定その他不動産又は特定の場所に係る処分又は裁決についての取消訴訟は、その不動産又は場所の所在地の裁判所にも、提起することができる。

(2)An action for the revocation of administrative dispositions pertaining to condemnation of land or establishment of a mining right or any other original administrative disposition or administrative determination pertaining to real property or a particular place may also be filed with the court that has jurisdiction over the location of the real property or place.

３取消訴訟は、当該処分又は裁決に関し事案の処理に当たつた下級行政機関の所在地の裁判所にも、提起することができる。

(3)An action for the revocation of an administrative disposition may also be filed with the court that has jurisdiction over the location of the lower administrative organ that has handled the case regarding the original administrative disposition or administrative determination.

４国又は独立行政法人通則法（平成十一年法律第百三号）第二条第一項に規定する独立行政法人若しくは別表に掲げる法人を被告とする取消訴訟は、原告の普通裁判籍の所在地を管轄する高等裁判所の所在地を管轄する地方裁判所（次項において「特定管轄裁判所」という。）にも、提起することができる。

(4)An action for the revocation of an administrative disposition against the State or an incorporated administrative agency prescribed in Article 2, paragraph (1) of the Act on General Rules for Incorporated Administrative Agencies (Act No. 103 of 1999) or any of the juridical persons listed in the appended table may also be filed with the district court that has jurisdiction over the location of the high court that has jurisdiction over the location of the plaintiff's general venue (hereinafter referred to as a "specified court with jurisdiction" in the following paragraph).

５前項の規定により特定管轄裁判所に同項の取消訴訟が提起された場合であつて、他の裁判所に事実上及び法律上同一の原因に基づいてされた処分又は裁決に係る抗告訴訟が係属している場合においては、当該特定管轄裁判所は、当事者の住所又は所在地、尋問を受けるべき証人の住所、争点又は証拠の共通性その他の事情を考慮して、相当と認めるときは、申立てにより又は職権で、訴訟の全部又は一部について、当該他の裁判所又は第一項から第三項までに定める裁判所に移送することができる。

(5)Where an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition set forth in the preceding paragraph is filed with a specified court with jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of that paragraph while an action for the judicial review of an administrative disposition is pending at another court with regard to another original administrative disposition or administrative determination that was made based on the de facto or de jure same cause as that of the former, the specified court with jurisdiction may, upon petition or by its own authority, transfer the whole or part of the action to that other court or any of the courts specified in paragraph (1) through paragraph (3), when it finds it appropriate while taking into consideration the address or location of each party, the address of each witness to be examined, the points at issue or evidence common to both cases, and other circumstances concerned.

第十三条取消訴訟と次の各号の一に該当する請求（以下「関連請求」という。）に係る訴訟とが各別の裁判所に係属する場合において、相当と認めるときは、関連請求に係る訴訟の係属する裁判所は、申立てにより又は職権で、その訴訟を取消訴訟の係属する裁判所に移送することができる。ただし、取消訴訟又は関連請求に係る訴訟の係属する裁判所が高等裁判所であるときは、この限りでない。

Article 13Where an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition and an action pertaining to a claim that falls under any of the following items (hereinafter referred to as a "related claim") are pending before different courts, the court before which the action pertaining to a related claim is pending may, upon petition or by its own authority, transfer the action to the other court before which the action for the revocation of the administrative disposition is pending, when it finds it appropriate; provided, however, that this does not apply where either the action for the revocation of the administrative disposition or the action pertaining to a related claim is pending before a high court:

第十四条取消訴訟は、処分又は裁決があつたことを知つた日から六箇月を経過したときは、提起することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

Article 14(1)No action for the revocation of an administrative disposition may be filed when a period of six months has elapsed from the day on which the person who seeks revocation became aware of the fact that the original administrative disposition or administrative determination was made; provided, however, that this does not apply if there are reasonable grounds for failing to meet that time limit.

２取消訴訟は、処分又は裁決の日から一年を経過したときは、提起することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

(2)No action for the revocation of an administrative disposition may be filed when a period of one year has elapsed from the date of the original administrative disposition or administrative determination; provided, however, that this does not apply if there are reasonable grounds for failing to meet that time limit.

３処分又は裁決につき審査請求をすることができる場合又は行政庁が誤つて審査請求をすることができる旨を教示した場合において、審査請求があつたときは、処分又は裁決に係る取消訴訟は、その審査請求をした者については、前二項の規定にかかわらず、これに対する裁決があつたことを知つた日から六箇月を経過したとき又は当該裁決の日から一年を経過したときは、提起することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

(3)If a request for administrative review is made with regard to an original administrative disposition or administrative determination in cases where a request for administrative review may be made or where an administrative authority has mistakenly informed that a request for administrative review may be made, the person who has made the request, notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, may not file an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition when a period of six months has elapsed from the day on which the person became aware of the fact that an administrative determination was made in response to their request for an administrative review or when a period of one year has elapsed from the date of the administrative determination; provided, however, that this does not apply if there are reasonable grounds for failing to meet that time limit.

第十五条取消訴訟において、原告が故意又は重大な過失によらないで被告とすべき者を誤つたときは、裁判所は、原告の申立てにより、決定をもつて、被告を変更することを許すことができる。

Article 15(1)When a plaintiff has, unintentionally or without gross negligence, sued a wrong person in an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition, the court may, upon the petition of the plaintiff, by an order, permit the plaintiff to change the defendant.

２前項の決定は、書面でするものとし、その正本を新たな被告に送達しなければならない。

(2)An order set forth in the preceding paragraph is to be made in writing, and the authenticated copy thereof is to be served upon a new defendant.

３第一項の決定があつたときは、出訴期間の遵守については、新たな被告に対する訴えは、最初に訴えを提起した時に提起されたものとみなす。

(3)When an order set forth in paragraph (1) is made, it is deemed, with regard to compliance with the statute of limitations for filing an action, that an action against a new defendant was filed at the time of the filing of the initial action.

４第一項の決定があつたときは、従前の被告に対しては、訴えの取下げがあつたものとみなす。

(4)When an order set forth in paragraph (1) is made, it is to be deemed that the action against the initial defendant has been withdrawn.

５第一項の決定に対しては、不服を申し立てることができない。

(5)No appeal may be entered against an order set forth in paragraph (1).

６第一項の申立てを却下する決定に対しては、即時抗告をすることができる。

(6)An immediate appeal may be filed against an order to dismiss without prejudice a petition set forth in paragraph (1).

７上訴審において第一項の決定をしたときは、裁判所は、その訴訟を管轄裁判所に移送しなければならない。

(7)When a court has made an order set forth in paragraph (1) in an appellate instance, the court must transfer the action to the court with jurisdiction.

第十六条取消訴訟には、関連請求に係る訴えを併合することができる。

Article 16(1)An action for the revocation of an administrative disposition may be joined with an action pertaining to a related claim.

２前項の規定により訴えを併合する場合において、取消訴訟の第一審裁判所が高等裁判所であるときは、関連請求に係る訴えの被告の同意を得なければならない。被告が異議を述べないで、本案について弁論をし、又は弁論準備手続において申述をしたときは、同意したものとみなす。

(2)In the case of the joinder of actions under the provisions of the preceding paragraph, if the court of first instance of the action for the revocation of an administrative disposition is a high court, it must obtain consent from the defendant in the action pertaining to a related claim. If the defendant has presented oral arguments on the merits or made statements in preparatory proceedings without making any objection, that defendant is deemed to have consented to the joinder of actions.

第十七条数人は、その数人の請求又はその数人に対する請求が処分又は裁決の取消しの請求と関連請求とである場合に限り、共同訴訟人として訴え、又は訴えられることができる。

Article 17(1)Two or more persons may sue or be sued as coparties only in cases where claims made by or against those persons are a claim for the revocation of an original administrative disposition or administrative determination and its related claim.

２前項の場合には、前条第二項の規定を準用する。

(2)In the case referred to in the preceding paragraph, the provisions of paragraph (2) of the preceding Article apply mutatis mutandis.

第十八条第三者は、取消訴訟の口頭弁論の終結に至るまで、その訴訟の当事者の一方を被告として、関連請求に係る訴えをこれに併合して提起することができる。この場合において、当該取消訴訟が高等裁判所に係属しているときは、第十六条第二項の規定を準用する。

Article 18A third party, until the conclusion of the oral argument of an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition, may file an additional action pertaining to a related claim against either of the parties to the action for revocation, by joining these actions.In this case, if the action for the revocation of that administrative disposition is pending before a high court, the provisions of Article 16, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis.

第十九条原告は、取消訴訟の口頭弁論の終結に至るまで、関連請求に係る訴えをこれに併合して提起することができる。この場合において、当該取消訴訟が高等裁判所に係属しているときは、第十六条第二項の規定を準用する。

Article 19(1)A plaintiff, until the conclusion of the oral argument of an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition, may file an additional action pertaining to a related claim, by joining these actions.In this case, if the action for the revocation of that administrative disposition is pending before a high court, the provisions of Article 16, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis.

２前項の規定は、取消訴訟について民事訴訟法（平成八年法律第百九号）第百四十三条の規定の例によることを妨げない。

(2)The provisions of the preceding paragraph do not preclude an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition from being governed by the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (Act No. 109 of 1996).

第二十条前条第一項前段の規定により、処分の取消しの訴えをその処分についての審査請求を棄却した裁決の取消しの訴えに併合して提起する場合には、同項後段において準用する第十六条第二項の規定にかかわらず、処分の取消しの訴えの被告の同意を得ることを要せず、また、その提起があつたときは、出訴期間の遵守については、処分の取消しの訴えは、裁決の取消しの訴えを提起した時に提起されたものとみなす。

Article 20When filing an action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition by joining it, pursuant to the provisions of the first sentence of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, with an action for the revocation of an administrative determination that has dismissed a request for an administrative review of the original administrative disposition, it is not be required to obtain consent from the defendant in the action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 16, paragraph (2) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the second sentence of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, and when an action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition is thus filed, it is deemed, with regard to compliance with the statute of limitations for filing an action, to have been filed at the time of the filing of the action for the revocation of an administrative determination.

第二十一条裁判所は、取消訴訟の目的たる請求を当該処分又は裁決に係る事務の帰属する国又は公共団体に対する損害賠償その他の請求に変更することが相当であると認めるときは、請求の基礎に変更がない限り、口頭弁論の終結に至るまで、原告の申立てにより、決定をもつて、訴えの変更を許すことができる。

Article 21(1)When the court finds it appropriate to amend the claim that is subject matter of an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition, to a claim for compensation for damages or any other claim against the State or a public entity in which the affairs pertaining to the original administrative disposition or administrative determination are vested, the court may, until the conclusion of the oral argument, upon the petition of the plaintiff, by an order, permit that amendment of the claim, unless there is any change to the basis for the claim.

２前項の決定には、第十五条第二項の規定を準用する。

(2)The provisions of Article 15, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis to an order set forth in the preceding paragraph.

３裁判所は、第一項の規定により訴えの変更を許す決定をするには、あらかじめ、当事者及び損害賠償その他の請求に係る訴えの被告の意見をきかなければならない。

(3)The court, when making an order to permit amendment of a claim pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1), must hear opinions in advance from the parties and the defendant in an action pertaining to a claim for compensation for damages or any other claim.

４訴えの変更を許す決定に対しては、即時抗告をすることができる。

(4)An immediate appeal may be filed against an order to permit amendment of a claim.

５訴えの変更を許さない決定に対しては、不服を申し立てることができない。

(5)No appeal may be entered against an order not to permit amendment of a claim.

第二十二条裁判所は、訴訟の結果により権利を害される第三者があるときは、当事者若しくはその第三者の申立てにより又は職権で、決定をもつて、その第三者を訴訟に参加させることができる。

Article 22(1)If the outcome of an action would prejudice a right of any third party, the court may, upon the petition of a party or the third party or by its own authority, by an order, have the third party intervene in the action.

２裁判所は、前項の決定をするには、あらかじめ、当事者及び第三者の意見をきかなければならない。

(2)The court, when making an order set forth in the preceding paragraph, must hear opinions in advance from the parties and the third party.

３第一項の申立てをした第三者は、その申立てを却下する決定に対して即時抗告をすることができる。

(3)A third party who has filed a petition set forth in paragraph (1) may file an immediate appeal against an order to dismiss the petition without prejudice.

４第一項の規定により訴訟に参加した第三者については、民事訴訟法第四十条第一項から第三項までの規定を準用する。

(4)The provisions of Article 40, paragraph (1) through paragraph (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure apply mutatis mutandis to a third party who has intervened in an action pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1).

５第一項の規定により第三者が参加の申立てをした場合には、民事訴訟法第四十五条第三項及び第四項の規定を準用する。

(5)Where a third party has filed a petition for intervention pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1), the provisions of Article 45, paragraph (3) and paragraph (4) of the Code of Civil Procedure apply mutatis mutandis.

第二十三条裁判所は、処分又は裁決をした行政庁以外の行政庁を訴訟に参加させることが必要であると認めるときは、当事者若しくはその行政庁の申立てにより又は職権で、決定をもつて、その行政庁を訴訟に参加させることができる。

Article 23(1)When the court finds it necessary to have an administrative authority other than the one that has made an original administrative disposition or administrative determination intervene in an action, the court may, upon the petition of a party or that other administrative authority or by the court's own authority, by an order, have the administrative authority intervene in the action.

２裁判所は、前項の決定をするには、あらかじめ、当事者及び当該行政庁の意見をきかなければならない。

(2)The court, when making an order set forth in the preceding paragraph, must hear opinions in advance from the parties and the administrative authority.

３第一項の規定により訴訟に参加した行政庁については、民事訴訟法第四十五条第一項及び第二項の規定を準用する。

(3)The provisions of Article 45, paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure apply mutatis mutandis to an administrative authority which has intervened in an action pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1).

第二十三条の二裁判所は、訴訟関係を明瞭にするため、必要があると認めるときは、次に掲げる処分をすることができる。

Article 23-2(1)The court, when it finds it necessary in order to clarify the matters related to the action, may make the following dispositions:

２裁判所は、処分についての審査請求に対する裁決を経た後に取消訴訟の提起があつたときは、次に掲げる処分をすることができる。

(2)When an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition is filed after an administrative determination is made in response to a request for administrative review of an original administrative disposition, the court may make the following dispositions:

第二十四条裁判所は、必要があると認めるときは、職権で、証拠調べをすることができる。ただし、その証拠調べの結果について、当事者の意見をきかなければならない。

Article 24The court, when it finds it necessary, may examine evidence by its own authority; provided, however, that the court must hear opinions from the parties with regard to the results of the examination of evidence.

第二十五条処分の取消しの訴えの提起は、処分の効力、処分の執行又は手続の続行を妨げない。

Article 25(1)The filing of an action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition does not preclude the effect of the original administrative disposition, the execution of the original administrative disposition or the continuation of any subsequent procedure.

２処分の取消しの訴えの提起があつた場合において、処分、処分の執行又は手続の続行により生ずる重大な損害を避けるため緊急の必要があるときは、裁判所は、申立てにより、決定をもつて、処分の効力、処分の執行又は手続の続行の全部又は一部の停止（以下「執行停止」という。）をすることができる。ただし、処分の効力の停止は、処分の執行又は手続の続行の停止によつて目的を達することができる場合には、することができない。

(2)Where an action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition is filed, if there is an urgent necessity in order to avoid any serious damage that would be caused by the original administrative disposition, the execution of the original administrative disposition or the continuation of any subsequent procedure, the court may, upon petition, by an order, stay the whole or part of the effect of the original administrative disposition, the execution of the original administrative disposition or the continuation of any subsequent procedure (hereinafter referred to as "stay of execution"); provided, however, that the court may not stay the effect of an original administrative disposition if the purpose can be achieved by staying the execution of the original administrative disposition or staying the continuation of any subsequent procedure.

３裁判所は、前項に規定する重大な損害を生ずるか否かを判断するに当たつては、損害の回復の困難の程度を考慮するものとし、損害の性質及び程度並びに処分の内容及び性質をも勘案するものとする。

(3)When judging whether or not any serious damage would be caused as prescribed in the preceding paragraph, the court is to consider the degree of difficulty in recovering from the damage and to take into consideration the nature and extent of the damage as well as the content and nature of the original administrative disposition.

４執行停止は、公共の福祉に重大な影響を及ぼすおそれがあるとき、又は本案について理由がないとみえるときは、することができない。

(4)Stay of execution may not be allowed when it is likely to seriously affect public welfare or when the action on the merits seems groundless.

５第二項の決定は、疎明に基づいてする。

(5)An order set forth in paragraph (2) is made based on a prima facie showing.

６第二項の決定は、口頭弁論を経ないですることができる。ただし、あらかじめ、当事者の意見をきかなければならない。

(6)An order set forth in paragraph (2) may be made without oral argument; provided, however, that the court must hear opinions in advance from the parties before making the order.

７第二項の申立てに対する決定に対しては、即時抗告をすることができる。

(7)An immediate appeal may be filed against an order on a petition set forth in paragraph (2).

８第二項の決定に対する即時抗告は、その決定の執行を停止する効力を有しない。

(8)An immediate appeal against an order set forth in paragraph (2) does not have the effect of staying the execution of the order.

第二十六条執行停止の決定が確定した後に、その理由が消滅し、その他事情が変更したときは、裁判所は、相手方の申立てにより、決定をもつて、執行停止の決定を取り消すことができる。

Article 26(1)If, after an order of stay of execution has become final and binding, the reasons for stay of execution have ceased to exist or the circumstances have otherwise changed, the court may, upon the petition of the party subject to stay of execution, by an order, revoke the order of stay of execution.

２前項の申立てに対する決定及びこれに対する不服については、前条第五項から第八項までの規定を準用する。

(2)The provisions of paragraph (5) thorough paragraph (8) of the preceding Article apply mutatis mutandis to an order on a petition set forth in the preceding paragraph and any objection against that order.

第二十七条第二十五条第二項の申立てがあつた場合には、内閣総理大臣は、裁判所に対し、異議を述べることができる。執行停止の決定があつた後においても、同様とする。

Article 27(1)Where a petition set forth in Article 25, paragraph (2) is filed, the Prime Minister may make an objection to the petition to the court. An objection may also be made after an order of stay of execution is made.

２前項の異議には、理由を附さなければならない。

(2)An objection set forth in the preceding paragraph must be accompanied by the reasons therefor.

３前項の異議の理由においては、内閣総理大臣は、処分の効力を存続し、処分を執行し、又は手続を続行しなければ、公共の福祉に重大な影響を及ぼすおそれのある事情を示すものとする。

(3)As for the reasons for an objection set forth in the preceding paragraph, the Prime Minister is to explain the circumstances where public welfare is likely to be seriously affected unless the effect of the original administrative disposition is maintained, the original administrative disposition is executed or any subsequent procedure is continued.

４第一項の異議があつたときは、裁判所は、執行停止をすることができず、また、すでに執行停止の決定をしているときは、これを取り消さなければならない。

(4)When an objection set forth in paragraph (1) is made, the court may not order stay of execution, and if the court has already made an order of stay of execution, it must revoke the order.

５第一項後段の異議は、執行停止の決定をした裁判所に対して述べなければならない。ただし、その決定に対する抗告が抗告裁判所に係属しているときは、抗告裁判所に対して述べなければならない。

(5)An objection set forth in the second sentence of paragraph (1) must be made to the court that has made the order of stay of execution; provided, however, that when an appeal against the order is pending before a court in charge of the appeal, that objection must be made to the court in charge of the appeal.

６内閣総理大臣は、やむをえない場合でなければ、第一項の異議を述べてはならず、また、異議を述べたときは、次の常会において国会にこれを報告しなければならない。

(6)Except where it is unavoidable, the Prime Minister may not make an objection set forth in paragraph (1), and if the Prime Minister has made an objection, the Prime Minister must report it to the Diet at the next ordinary session.

第二十八条執行停止又はその決定の取消しの申立ての管轄裁判所は、本案の係属する裁判所とする。

Article 28The court with jurisdiction over a petition for a stay of execution or for the revocation of an order of stay of execution is the court before which the action on the merits is pending.

第二十九条前四条の規定は、裁決の取消しの訴えの提起があつた場合における執行停止に関する事項について準用する。

Article 29The provisions of the preceding four Articles apply mutatis mutandis to the matters concerning stay of execution in cases where an action for the revocation of an administrative determination is filed.

第三十条行政庁の裁量処分については、裁量権の範囲をこえ又はその濫用があつた場合に限り、裁判所は、その処分を取り消すことができる。

Article 30The court may revoke an original administrative disposition made by an administrative authority at its discretion only in cases where the disposition has been made beyond the bounds of the agency's discretionary power or through an abuse of that power.

第三十一条取消訴訟については、処分又は裁決が違法ではあるが、これを取り消すことにより公の利益に著しい障害を生ずる場合において、原告の受ける損害の程度、その損害の賠償又は防止の程度及び方法その他一切の事情を考慮したうえ、処分又は裁決を取り消すことが公共の福祉に適合しないと認めるときは、裁判所は、請求を棄却することができる。この場合には、当該判決の主文において、処分又は裁決が違法であることを宣言しなければならない。

Article 31(1)In an action for the revocation of an administrative disposition, the court may dismiss a claim with prejudice on the merits in cases where the original administrative disposition or administrative determination is illegal but the revocation thereof is likely to seriously affect public welfare, if the court, having considered the extent of any possible damage to be suffered by the plaintiff, the extent and method of compensation for or prevention of that damage and all other circumstances concerned, finds that the revocation of the original administrative disposition or administrative determination is not in line with public welfare. In this case, the court must declare the illegality of the original administrative disposition or administrative determination in the main text of the judgment of dismissal.

２裁判所は、相当と認めるときは、終局判決前に、判決をもつて、処分又は裁決が違法であることを宣言することができる。

(2)The court, when it finds it appropriate, may declare the illegality of an original administrative disposition or administrative determination by a judgment before making a final judgment.

３終局判決に事実及び理由を記載するには、前項の判決を引用することができる。

(3)The court may cite a judgment set forth in the preceding paragraph when stating the facts and reasons in a final judgment.

第三十二条処分又は裁決を取り消す判決は、第三者に対しても効力を有する。

Article 32(1)A judgment to revoke an original administrative disposition or administrative determination may also be effective against a third party.

２前項の規定は、執行停止の決定又はこれを取り消す決定に準用する。

(2)The provisions of the preceding paragraph apply mutatis mutandis to an order of stay of execution or an order to revoke an order of stay of execution.

第三十三条処分又は裁決を取り消す判決は、その事件について、処分又は裁決をした行政庁その他の関係行政庁を拘束する。

Article 33(1)A judgment to revoke an original administrative disposition or administrative determination is binding on the administrative authority that has made the original administrative disposition or administrative determination and any other relevant administrative authority with regard to the case.

２申請を却下し若しくは棄却した処分又は審査請求を却下し若しくは棄却した裁決が判決により取り消されたときは、その処分又は裁決をした行政庁は、判決の趣旨に従い、改めて申請に対する処分又は審査請求に対する裁決をしなければならない。

(2)When a judgment is made to revoke an original administrative disposition that has dismissed an application with or without prejudice or to revoke an administrative determination that has dismissed a request for administrative review with or without prejudice, the administrative authority that has made the original administrative disposition or administrative determination must, according to the purport of the judgment, make another original administrative disposition on the application or another administrative determination on the request for administrative review.

３前項の規定は、申請に基づいてした処分又は審査請求を認容した裁決が判決により手続に違法があることを理由として取り消された場合に準用する。

(3)The provisions of the preceding paragraph apply mutatis mutandis where an original administrative disposition made based on an application or an administrative determination upholding a request for administrative review is revoked by a judgment by reason of an illegal procedural defect.

４第一項の規定は、執行停止の決定に準用する。

(4)The provisions of paragraph (1) apply mutatis mutandis to an order of stay of execution.

第三十四条処分又は裁決を取り消す判決により権利を害された第三者で、自己の責めに帰することができない理由により訴訟に参加することができなかつたため判決に影響を及ぼすべき攻撃又は防御の方法を提出することができなかつたものは、これを理由として、確定の終局判決に対し、再審の訴えをもつて、不服の申立てをすることができる。

Article 34(1)Where a third party whose right is prejudiced by a judgment to revoke an original administrative disposition or administrative determination has failed to intervene in the action due to any grounds not attributable to that person and therefore failed to advance any allegation or evidence that should have affected a judgment, that person may file an action for retrial to enter an appeal against a final judgment that has become final and binding on the grounds of that failure.

２前項の訴えは、確定判決を知つた日から三十日以内に提起しなければならない。

(2)An action set forth in the preceding paragraph must be filed within 30 days from the day on which the third party became aware of the final and binding judgment.

３前項の期間は、不変期間とする。

(3)The period set forth in the preceding paragraph may not be an unextendable period.

４第一項の訴えは、判決が確定した日から一年を経過したときは、提起することができない。

(4)No action set forth in paragraph (1) may be filed when a period of one year has elapsed from the day on which the judgment became final and binding.

第三十五条国又は公共団体に所属する行政庁が当事者又は参加人である訴訟における確定した訴訟費用の裁判は、当該行政庁が所属する国又は公共団体に対し、又はそれらの者のために、効力を有する。

Article 35A final and binding judicial decision on the burden of court costs in an action wherein an administrative authority affiliated with the State or a public entity stands as a party or intervener is effective against or in the interest of the State or the public entity with which the administrative authority is affiliated.

第三十六条無効等確認の訴えは、当該処分又は裁決に続く処分により損害を受けるおそれのある者その他当該処分又は裁決の無効等の確認を求めるにつき法律上の利益を有する者で、当該処分若しくは裁決の存否又はその効力の有無を前提とする現在の法律関係に関する訴えによつて目的を達することができないものに限り、提起することができる。

Article 36An action for the declaration of nullity, etc. of an original administrative disposition or administrative determination may be filed only by a person who is likely to suffer damage from that original administrative disposition or any disposition following that administrative determination or any other person who has legal interest to seek the declaration of nullity, etc. of the original administrative disposition or administrative determination, where the person is unable to achieve the purpose by filing an action concerning the existing legal relationship which is based on the existence or non-existence of or validity or invalidity of the original administrative disposition or administrative determination.

第三十七条不作為の違法確認の訴えは、処分又は裁決についての申請をした者に限り、提起することができる。

Article 37An action for the declaration of illegality of inaction may be filed only by a person who has filed an application for an original administrative disposition or administrative determination.

第三十七条の二第三条第六項第一号に掲げる場合において、義務付けの訴えは、一定の処分がされないことにより重大な損害を生ずるおそれがあり、かつ、その損害を避けるため他に適当な方法がないときに限り、提起することができる。

Article 37-2(1)In the case set forth in Article 3, paragraph (6), item (i), a mandamus action may be filed only when any serious damage is likely to be caused if a certain original administrative disposition is not made and there are no other appropriate means to avoid that damage.

２裁判所は、前項に規定する重大な損害を生ずるか否かを判断するに当たつては、損害の回復の困難の程度を考慮するものとし、損害の性質及び程度並びに処分の内容及び性質をも勘案するものとする。

(2)When judging whether or not any serious damage would be caused as prescribed in the preceding paragraph, the court is to consider the degree of difficulty in recovering from the damage and to take into consideration the nature and extent of the damage as well as the content and nature of the original administrative disposition.

３第一項の義務付けの訴えは、行政庁が一定の処分をすべき旨を命ずることを求めるにつき法律上の利益を有する者に限り、提起することができる。

(3)A mandamus action set forth in paragraph (1) may be filed only by a person who has legal interest to seek an order to the effect that an administrative authority should make a certain original administrative disposition.

４前項に規定する法律上の利益の有無の判断については、第九条第二項の規定を準用する。

(4)The provisions of Article 9, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis with regard to the judging of whether or not there is legal interest prescribed in the preceding paragraph.

５義務付けの訴えが第一項及び第三項に規定する要件に該当する場合において、その義務付けの訴えに係る処分につき、行政庁がその処分をすべきであることがその処分の根拠となる法令の規定から明らかであると認められ又は行政庁がその処分をしないことがその裁量権の範囲を超え若しくはその濫用となると認められるときは、裁判所は、行政庁がその処分をすべき旨を命ずる判決をする。

(5)Where a mandamus action satisfies the requirements prescribed in paragraph (1) and paragraph (3), if it is found that the provisions of the laws and regulations which give a basis for an original administrative disposition pertaining to a mandamus action clearly show that the administrative authority should make the original administrative disposition, or it is found that the administrative authority's inaction to make the original administrative disposition goes beyond the bounds of the agency's discretionary power or constitutes an abuse of that power, the court makes a judgment to order that the administrative authority should make the original administrative disposition.

第三十七条の三第三条第六項第二号に掲げる場合において、義務付けの訴えは、次の各号に掲げる要件のいずれかに該当するときに限り、提起することができる。

Article 37-3(1)In the case set forth in Article 3, paragraph (6), item (ii), a mandamus action may be filed only when any of the requirements listed in the following items is satisfied:

２前項の義務付けの訴えは、同項各号に規定する法令に基づく申請又は審査請求をした者に限り、提起することができる。

(2)A mandamus action set forth in the preceding paragraph may be filed only by a person who has filed an application or made a request for administrative review under the laws and regulations prescribed in each item of that paragraph.

３第一項の義務付けの訴えを提起するときは、次の各号に掲げる区分に応じてそれぞれ当該各号に定める訴えをその義務付けの訴えに併合して提起しなければならない。この場合において、当該各号に定める訴えに係る訴訟の管轄について他の法律に特別の定めがあるときは、当該義務付けの訴えに係る訴訟の管轄は、第三十八条第一項において準用する第十二条の規定にかかわらず、その定めに従う。

(3)A mandamus action set forth in paragraph (1) must be filed by joining with it each of the actions specified in the following items according to the categories of cases listed in the respective items.In this case, if there are special provisions in any other law with regard to the jurisdiction over a suit pertaining to each of the actions specified in those items, those special provisions govern the jurisdiction over the suit pertaining to the mandamus action, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 12 as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 38, paragraph (1):

４前項の規定により併合して提起された義務付けの訴え及び同項各号に定める訴えに係る弁論及び裁判は、分離しないでしなければならない。

(4)Oral arguments and judicial decisions in a mandamus action and the action specified in each item of the preceding paragraph, which are filed and joined pursuant to the provisions of that paragraph, must not be made separately.

５義務付けの訴えが第一項から第三項までに規定する要件に該当する場合において、同項各号に定める訴えに係る請求に理由があると認められ、かつ、その義務付けの訴えに係る処分又は裁決につき、行政庁がその処分若しくは裁決をすべきであることがその処分若しくは裁決の根拠となる法令の規定から明らかであると認められ又は行政庁がその処分若しくは裁決をしないことがその裁量権の範囲を超え若しくはその濫用となると認められるときは、裁判所は、その義務付けの訴えに係る処分又は裁決をすべき旨を命ずる判決をする。

(5)Where a mandamus action satisfies the requirements prescribed in paragraph (1) to paragraph (3), if it is found that the claim pertaining to the action specified in each item of paragraph (3) is well-grounded, and it is also found that the provisions of the laws and regulations which give a basis for an original administrative disposition or administrative determination pertaining to a mandamus action clearly show that the administrative authority should make the original administrative disposition or administrative determination, or it is found that the administrative authority's inaction to make the original administrative disposition or administrative determination goes beyond the bounds of the authority's discretionary power or constitutes an abuse of that power, the court makes a judgment to order that the administrative authority should make the original administrative disposition or administrative determination pertaining to the mandamus action.

６第四項の規定にかかわらず、裁判所は、審理の状況その他の事情を考慮して、第三項各号に定める訴えについてのみ終局判決をすることがより迅速な争訟の解決に資すると認めるときは、当該訴えについてのみ終局判決をすることができる。この場合において、裁判所は、当該訴えについてのみ終局判決をしたときは、当事者の意見を聴いて、当該訴えに係る訴訟手続が完結するまでの間、義務付けの訴えに係る訴訟手続を中止することができる。

(6)Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (4), when the court finds, in consideration of the developments in proceedings and other circumstances, that it will contribute to more expeditious settlement of the dispute to make a final judgment only with regard to the action specified in each item of paragraph (3), the court may make a final judgment only with regard to that action.In this case, when the court has made a final judgment only with regard to that action, it may, until litigation proceedings for that action are completed, suspend litigation proceedings for a mandamus action, hearing opinions from the parties.

７第一項の義務付けの訴えのうち、行政庁が一定の裁決をすべき旨を命ずることを求めるものは、処分についての審査請求がされた場合において、当該処分に係る処分の取消しの訴え又は無効等確認の訴えを提起することができないときに限り、提起することができる。

(7)A mandamus action set forth in paragraph (1) which seeks an order to the effect that an administrative authority should make a certain administrative determination may be filed only in cases where a request for an administrative review of the original administrative disposition has been made and no action for the revocation of the original administrative disposition or action for the declaration of nullity, etc. of the original administrative disposition may be filed.

第三十七条の四差止めの訴えは、一定の処分又は裁決がされることにより重大な損害を生ずるおそれがある場合に限り、提起することができる。ただし、その損害を避けるため他に適当な方法があるときは、この限りでない。

Article 37-4(1)An action for an injunctive order may be filed only in cases where any serious damage is likely to be caused if a certain original administrative disposition or administrative determination is made; provided, however, that this does not apply if there are any other appropriate means to avoid that damage.

２裁判所は、前項に規定する重大な損害を生ずるか否かを判断するに当たつては、損害の回復の困難の程度を考慮するものとし、損害の性質及び程度並びに処分又は裁決の内容及び性質をも勘案するものとする。

(2)When judging whether or not any serious damage would be caused as prescribed in the preceding paragraph, the court is to consider the degree of difficulty in recovering from the damage and to take into consideration the nature and extent of the damage as well as the content and nature of the original administrative disposition or administrative determination.

３差止めの訴えは、行政庁が一定の処分又は裁決をしてはならない旨を命ずることを求めるにつき法律上の利益を有する者に限り、提起することができる。

(3)An action for an injunctive order may be filed only by a person who has legal interest to seek an order to the effect that an administrative authority should not make a certain original administrative disposition or administrative determination.

４前項に規定する法律上の利益の有無の判断については、第九条第二項の規定を準用する。

(4)The provisions of Article 9, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis with regard to the judging of whether or not there is legal interest prescribed in the preceding paragraph.

５差止めの訴えが第一項及び第三項に規定する要件に該当する場合において、その差止めの訴えに係る処分又は裁決につき、行政庁がその処分若しくは裁決をすべきでないことがその処分若しくは裁決の根拠となる法令の規定から明らかであると認められ又は行政庁がその処分若しくは裁決をすることがその裁量権の範囲を超え若しくはその濫用となると認められるときは、裁判所は、行政庁がその処分又は裁決をしてはならない旨を命ずる判決をする。

(5)Where an action for an injunctive order satisfies the requirements prescribed in paragraph (1) and paragraph (3), if it is found that the provisions of the laws and regulations which give a basis for an original administrative disposition or administrative determination pertaining to an action for an injunctive order clearly show that the administrative authority should not make the original administrative disposition or administrative determination, or it is found that the administrative authority's act to make the original administrative disposition or administrative determination goes beyond the bounds of the authority's discretionary power or constitutes an abuse of that power, the court makes a judgment to order that the administrative authority should not make the original administrative disposition or administrative determination.

第三十七条の五義務付けの訴えの提起があつた場合において、その義務付けの訴えに係る処分又は裁決がされないことにより生ずる償うことのできない損害を避けるため緊急の必要があり、かつ、本案について理由があるとみえるときは、裁判所は、申立てにより、決定をもつて、仮に行政庁がその処分又は裁決をすべき旨を命ずること（以下この条において「仮の義務付け」という。）ができる。

Article 37-5(1)Where a mandamus action is filed, if there is an urgent necessity in order to avoid any damage that cannot be compensated, which would be caused due to an original administrative disposition or administrative determination pertaining to the mandamus action not being made, and the action on the merits seems well-grounded, the court may, upon petition, make an order to the effect that an administrative authority should make the original administrative disposition or administrative determination on a provisional basis (hereinafter referred to as a "provisional order of mandamus" in this Article).

２差止めの訴えの提起があつた場合において、その差止めの訴えに係る処分又は裁決がされることにより生ずる償うことのできない損害を避けるため緊急の必要があり、かつ、本案について理由があるとみえるときは、裁判所は、申立てにより、決定をもつて、仮に行政庁がその処分又は裁決をしてはならない旨を命ずること（以下この条において「仮の差止め」という。）ができる。

(2)Where an action for an injunctive order is filed, if there is an urgent necessity in order to avoid any damage that cannot be compensated, which would be caused due to an original administrative disposition or administrative determination pertaining to the action for injunctive order being made, and the action on the merits seems well-grounded, the court may, upon petition, make an order to the effect that an administrative authority should not make the original administrative disposition or administrative determination on a provisional basis (hereinafter referred to as a "provisional injunctive order" in this Article).

３仮の義務付け又は仮の差止めは、公共の福祉に重大な影響を及ぼすおそれがあるときは、することができない。

(3)No provisional order of mandamus or provisional injunctive order may be made when that order is likely to seriously affect public welfare.

４第二十五条第五項から第八項まで、第二十六条から第二十八条まで及び第三十三条第一項の規定は、仮の義務付け又は仮の差止めに関する事項について準用する。

(4)The provisions of Article 25, paragraph (5) through paragraph (8), Article 26 through Article 28, and Article 33, paragraph (1) apply mutatis mutandis to the matters concerning a provisional order of mandamus or provisional injunctive order.

５前項において準用する第二十五条第七項の即時抗告についての裁判又は前項において準用する第二十六条第一項の決定により仮の義務付けの決定が取り消されたときは、当該行政庁は、当該仮の義務付けの決定に基づいてした処分又は裁決を取り消さなければならない。

(5)When a provisional order of mandamus is revoked by a judicial decision on an immediate appeal set forth in Article 25, paragraph (7) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph or by an order set forth in Article 26, paragraph (1) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph, the administrative authority must revoke the original administrative disposition or administrative determination that it has made based on the provisional order of mandamus.

第三十八条第十一条から第十三条まで、第十六条から第十九条まで、第二十一条から第二十三条まで、第二十四条、第三十三条及び第三十五条の規定は、取消訴訟以外の抗告訴訟について準用する。

Article 38(1)The provisions of Article 11 through Article 13, Article 16 through Article 19, Article 21 through Article 23, Article 24, Article 33, and Article 35 apply mutatis mutandis to actions for the judicial review of an administrative disposition which are other than actions for the revocation of an administrative disposition.

２第十条第二項の規定は、処分の無効等確認の訴えとその処分についての審査請求を棄却した裁決に係る抗告訴訟とを提起することができる場合に、第二十条の規定は、処分の無効等確認の訴えをその処分についての審査請求を棄却した裁決に係る抗告訴訟に併合して提起する場合に準用する。

(2)The provisions of Article 10, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis where both an action for the declaration of nullity, etc. of an original administrative disposition and an action for the judicial review of an administrative disposition against an administrative determination that has dismissed a request for an administrative review of that original administrative disposition may be filed, and the provisions of Article 20 apply mutatis mutandis where an action for the declaration of nullity, etc. of an original administrative disposition may be filed by joining it with an action for the judicial review of an administrative disposition against an administrative determination that has dismissed a request for an administrative review of that original administrative disposition.

３第二十三条の二、第二十五条から第二十九条まで及び第三十二条第二項の規定は、無効等確認の訴えについて準用する。

(3)The provisions of Article 23-2, Article 25 through Article 29, and Article 32, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis to an action for the declaration of nullity, etc.

４第八条及び第十条第二項の規定は、不作為の違法確認の訴えに準用する。

(4)The provisions of Article 8 and Article 10, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis to an action for the declaration of illegality of inaction.