عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]چکیده [English]
Since the establishment of the administrative court of justice, there has been a dispute over actionable claims in this new court. The ambiguity of law in this context has led to conflicts in legal doctrine in introducing diagnosis criteria of actionable claims in that court. These two elements -ambiguity of law and conflicting legal doctrine– has affected the decisions made by the court's judges. The present study tries to examine and evaluate the diagnosis criteria of actionable claims in the court from the perspective of law, doctrine and judicial proceeding, using a descriptive–analytical method and with a fundamental consideration of the limits and the type of jurisdiction of the administrative court of justice. It attempts, therefore, to yield a right approach to the court's jurisdiction and the related diagnosis criteria of actionable claims.