Search

Search provisions, jump to a law or an article

1 article

Article 25Stay of Enforcement

第二十五条(執行停止)

A request for review does not preclude the effect of the disposition, enforcement of the disposition, or continuation of the procedures.

審査請求は、処分の効力、処分の執行又は手続の続行を妨げない。

When finding it necessary, the higher administrative agency of the administrative agency reaching the disposition or the reviewing agency that is the administrative agency reaching the disposition may suspend the effect of the disposition, enforcement of the disposition, or continuation of procedures, in full or in part, or take other measures (referred to as "stay of enforcement" below), upon a petition filed by the requestor for review or by its authority.

処分庁の上級行政庁又は処分庁である審査庁は、必要があると認める場合には、審査請求人の申立てにより又は職権で、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その他の措置(以下「執行停止」という。)をとることができる。

When finding it necessary, the reviewing agency that is neither the higher administrative agency of the administrative agency reaching the disposition nor the administrative agency reaching the disposition may order a stay of enforcement, by a petition filed by the requestor for review, after hearing opinions of the administrative agency reaching the disposition; provided, however, that the reviewing agency may not take any measures other than suspending the effect of the disposition, stay of enforcement of the disposition, or continuation of procedures, in full or in part.

処分庁の上級行政庁又は処分庁のいずれでもない審査庁は、必要があると認める場合には、審査請求人の申立てにより、処分庁の意見を聴取した上、執行停止をすることができる。ただし、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外の措置をとることはできない。

When a petition has been filed by the requestor for review under the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, and the reviewing agency finds it urgently necessary for avoiding causing serious damage by the disposition, the stay of enforcement of the disposition, or the continuation of procedures, the reviewing agency must order a stay of enforcement; provided, however, that this does not apply when the stay of enforcement is likely to have a material impact on public welfare or when the action on the merits seems groundless.

前二項の規定による審査請求人の申立てがあった場合において、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に緊急の必要があると認めるときは、審査庁は、執行停止をしなければならない。ただし、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、この限りでない。

When determining whether the serious damage prescribed in the preceding paragraph is to be caused or not, the reviewing agency is to consider the level of difficulty in recovering the damage and also take into account the nature and extent of the damage and the content and nature of the disposition.

審査庁は、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っては、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。

In the cases referred to in paragraphs (2) through (4), the suspension of the effect of the disposition may not be ordered when the intended purpose may be achieved through measures other than the suspension of the effect of the disposition.

第二項から第四項までの場合において、処分の効力の停止は、処分の効力の停止以外の措置によって目的を達することができるときは、することができない。

When a petition for a stay of enforcement has been filed, or a written opinion stating that the stay of enforcement prescribed in Article 40 should be taken has been submitted by a review officer, the reviewing agency must promptly decide whether or not to order a stay of enforcement.

執行停止の申立てがあったとき、又は審理員から第四十条に規定する執行停止をすべき旨の意見書が提出されたときは、審査庁は、速やかに、執行停止をするかどうかを決定しなければならない。

Read this with the articles around it

© 2026 japanlaw.orgA copy for reading and reference — not an official source, and not legal advice. Only the Japanese text published by the government has legal effect.Run by Genjido LLC (Genjido 合同会社) · [email protected]ContactSourcesTermsPrivacy