作为民主意识提升和法治水平进步的典型标志，信赖利益保护原则内蕴约束行政权和保护行政相对人信赖利益的法治精神，目前已经被视为建设现代法治国家的核心理念之一。我国行政法学界对信赖利益保护原则的探讨多集中于基础理论层面，对该原则司法适用的本土化进展及现存困境的研究略显薄弱。实践中，虽然我国现行行政法体系中尚不具有完全意义上的信赖利益保护原则实体法规范，但我国法院对该原则的适用却展示出了司法能动主义立场。有鉴于此，本文结合 937 份我国法院援引信赖利益保护原则进行裁判的司法案例，系统梳理和分析我国行政法上信赖利益保护原则司法适用的本土化进展以及现存困境，并为现存困境的纾解，提出相应的困境纾解建议。

具体来说，本文除绪论和结语外，共分为四个部分。第一部分主要阐释信赖利益的内涵、构成要件和保护方式，并讨论了信赖利益保护原则的法理基础及价值位阶，详细论证该原则司法适用的正当性。第二部分梳理和分析我国行政法上信赖利益保护原则司法适用的整体现状。尽管我国行政法上的信赖利益保护原则仅在《行政许可法》第 8 条和第 69条有初步体现，但我国法院并没有摒弃对该原则的适用，而是将其适用范围从行政许可领域类推适用至行政协议、行政允诺、行政规划等领域。第三部分研究信赖利益构成要件的司法适用。我国法院对于信赖利益构成要件的适用主要集中于“信赖基础”和“正当信赖”。对于“信赖基础”的适用，我国法院主要关注其表现形式以及效力。在表现形式层面，除具体行政行为外，法院同时也将抽象行政行为和行政惯例纳入适用范围。在效力层面，“重大且明显违法”是信赖基础无效的主要标准。目前，我国行政法上信赖利益构成要件的司法适用表现出理论“空转”和适用模式“摇摆”的困境。为纾解此种困境，一方面，应努力提高法官的说理水平，增强裁判的说服力；另一方面，应基于保护公民权利的价值取向，调试信赖利益构成要件的认定标准与适用思路，为事实上的信赖利益被纳入保护范围提供更大空间。第四部分研究信赖利益保护方式的司法适用。在司法实践中，信赖利益的存续性保护主要体现为维持被行政相对人所信赖的“信赖基础”的存续状态，以最大限度地保护行政相对人所取得的法律地位或利益。信赖利益的财产性保护体现为，基于“行政相对人信赖利益遭受损失”这一前提，直接责令行政主体补偿或者告知行政相对人相应的救济途径。目前，存续性保护和财产性保护的司法适用分别面临着适用空间限缩和救济效果不足的困境。对此，应从利益衡量机制、判决形式、行政补偿制度等层面健全信赖利益的保护机制。

As a typical symbol of the improvement of democratic consciousness and the progress of national rule of law, the principle of reliance interest protection contains the spirit of substantive rule of law, which can restrain the executive power and protect the reliance interest of administrative relative person. At present, It has been regarded as one of the core idea of building the modern country under the rule of law. The Chinese administrative law circle mainly focuses on the basic theoretical of the principle of reliance interest protection, not the status quo and predicament of the judicial application of the principle of reliance interest protection in China. Although there is not a complete substantive law norm of the principle of reliance interest in Chinese current administrative law system, the Chinese judiciary authorities have demonstrated the proactive stance of safeguarding substantive justice in the application of the principle of reliance benefit protection. Based on 937 judicial cases in which the principle of reliance interest protection is invoked by the Chinese judiciary authorities, this thesis will systematically summarize and analyze the indigenization progress and existing predicament of judicial application of the principle of reliance interest protection in Chinese administrative law. With the spirit of substantive rule of law, this paper also will put forward some specific suggestions for the solution of the existing predicament.

In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this thesis is divided into four parts. The first part mainly explains the connotation, constitutive elements and protection methods of reliance interest, and systematically demonstrate the legitimacy of the judicial application of the principle of reliance interest protection in Chinese administrative law through discussing the legal basis and value hierarchy of the principle of reliance interest protection.The second part summarizes
and analyzes the status quo of judicial application of the principle of reliance interest protection in Chinese administrative law. At the level of legal regulation system, the principle of reliance interest protection in the Chinese administrative law is only preliminarily embodied in the 8th and 69th articles of the Administrative License Law of the People’s Republic of China. At the level of judicial practice, the Chinese judiciary authorities does not abandon the application of this principle, but broke through the inherent limitations of legal norms, and apply the scope of application from the general field of administrative license to the field of administrative agreement, administrative promise, administrative planning, etc. The third part studies the judicial application of the constitutive elements of reliance interest. The application of the Chinese judiciary authorities to the constitutive elements of reliance interest mainly focuses on "reliance basis" and "just reliance". As for the application of "reliance basis", the Chinese judiciary authorities are mainly concerned with its effectiveness and manifestations. In terms of effectiveness, "significant and clearly illegal" is the main criterion for the invalidity of reliance basis. At the level of manifestations, in addition to concrete act of administration, the Chinese judiciary authorities also accept abstract act of administration and the administrative customs. Idling theory and swinging application mode has became the predicament in the judicial application of constitutive elements of reliance interest in the Chinese administrative law. Therefore, the Chinese judiciary authorities should strive to improve the level of judicial reasoning ability. On the other hand, based on the value orientation of protecting citizens' rights, the Chinese judiciary authorities should adjust the identification standard and application mode of the constituent elements of reliance interest, so as to provide more space for the protection of the actual reliance interest. The fourth part studies the judicial application of the means of protecting reliance interest. In judicial practice, the continuity protection of reliance interest is mainly embodied in maintaining the existence of the prior administrative act trusted by the administration relative, so as to protect the legal status or interests obtained by the administration relative to the greatest extent. The asset protection of reliance interest is embodied in that, based on the premise that "the administration relative’s reliance interest suffered losses", the Chinese judiciary authorities will directly order the administration subject to compensate or inform the administration relative to find another remedy way. At present, the judicial application of continuity protection and asset protection are facing the predicament of limited application space and insufficient relief effect respectively. Therefore, we should improve the protection mechanism of reliance interest from the aspects of interest balancing mechanism, judgment form and compensation system.