10. How to sue the government: judicial processes and judicial remedies

2021 ◽  
pp. 379-427
Author(s):  
Timothy Endicott

This chapter addresses the extraordinary process of judicial review and the remedies available to the court. The process and the remedies are compared to the process and remedies in ordinary claims (which can also be used to control administrative action). In their self-regulation in developing these complex processes, the challenge for judges is to keep things in proportion: the attempt to achieve due process in judicial control of administrative action is essential to the administration of justice. The chapter explains the irony of process, which was introduced in Chapter 4: the courts may need to provide forms of process that are excessive and wasteful in some cases, in order to protect the administration of justice.

Author(s):  
Timothy Endicott

This chapter addresses the extraordinary process of judicial review and the remedies available to the court. The process and remedies are compared to the process and remedies in ordinary claims (which can also be used to control administrative action). In their self-regulation in developing these complex processes, the challenge for judges is to keep things in proportion: the attempt to achieve due process in judicial control of administrative action is essential to the administration of justice. The chapter explains the irony of process, which was introduced in Chapter 4: the courts may need to provide forms of process that are excessive and wasteful in some cases, in order to protect the administration of justice.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 906
Author(s):  
Cholidin Nasir

Salah satu unsur terpenting negara hukum menurut Sri Soemantri adalah pengawasan dari badan-badan peradilan. Salah satu bentuk pengawasan adalah judicial review yang dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Agung dan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Namun, tidak semua tindakan pemerintah berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan yang telah ada. Beberapa tindakan atau kebijakan pemerintah justru lahir lebih dahulu sebelum adanya peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur dan bahkan beberapa peraturan perundang-undangan dibentuk untuk melahirkan kebijakan pemerintah yang justru merugikan warga negara.Terkadang sengketa hukum terjadi bermula dari kebijakan yang dikeluarkan oleh pemerintah, yangseharusnya mempertimbangkan kepentingan umum atau kepentingan orang banyak (publik)dan bukan hanya kepentingan orang per orang saja, namun kenyataannya banyak terjadi suatu kebijakan merugikan kepentingan umum, sehingga acapkali kepentingan umum diabaikan yang pada akhirnya kepentingan umum tidak lagi menjadi prioritas utama. Hal inilah yang menjadi penyebab pelanggaran hukum yang dilakukan oleh penguasa. Terjadinya pelanggaran hukum inilah yang menimbulkan daya dorong bagi masyarakat untuk ikut berperan serta dalam upaya menyelesaikan sengketa guna menegakkan hukum.Dalam tulisan ini penulis hanya akan membahas penyelesaian melalui badan peradilan sebagai salah satu syarat dari negara hukum (rechtstaat) yaitu judicial control. Badan peradilan merupakan suatu badan yang memegang peranan penting dalam penyelesaian sengketa. Salah satu gugatan kelompok yang dilakukan oleh para pencari keadilan adalah gugatan citizen lawsuit;One of the most important elements of state law by Sri Soemantri is the supervision of the judicial authorities. One form of oversight is judicial review conducted by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. However, not all government action based on legislation that has been there. Some activities or government policies born before the legislation that governs and even some legislation established to give birth to government policies that harm the citizens. Sometimes a legal dispute occurs stems from policies issued by the government, which should take into consideration the public interest or the interests of many (public) and not just the interests of individuals. There were many cases of a policy detrimental to the public interest so that often the public interest is ignored that the ultimately the public interest is no longer a top priority. This is the cause of the violation committed by the authorities. Violations of the laws are what caused the impetus for the public to participate in efforts to resolve the dispute to enforce the law. In this paper, the authors will only discuss a settlement through the judiciary as one of the requirements of state law (rechtstaat) is judicial control. The judiciary is a body that plays important role in the settlement of disputes. One of a class action carried out by those seeking justice is a citizen lawsuit.


2021 ◽  
pp. 75-78
Author(s):  
Thierry Tanquerel

This chapter examines administrative procedure and judicial review in Switzerland. Article 29a of the Federal Constitution (Cst.) provides that 'In a legal dispute, every person has the right to have their case determined by a judicial authority. The Confederation and the Cantons may by law preclude the determination by the courts of certain exceptional categories of case'. It is widely recognized that Article 29a Cst. grants the right of judicial review of administrative action to everyone whose rights or obligations are affected by such an action. Judicial review of administrative action is entrusted partly to courts with general jurisdiction, partly to specialized administrative courts, and partly to specific independent appellate committees. As a general principle, procedural rights are deemed 'formal rights' by the Federal Tribunal, whose violation would cause the act or the measure at stake to be quashed irrespective of its substantive merits. However, there are certain acts or measures issued by Swiss authorities which escape judicial control, when those acts or measures are primarily of a political nature. When an act is appealed before a court, the only question at stake is the validity of the act. If the court finds it unlawful for procedural or substantive reasons, it will either quash it or modify it to make it lawful.


In the article, a comparison is made between constitutional review and judicial review exercised by courts of general jurisdiction in Russia on the basis of comparative-law methodology. The author concludes that it is necessary to empower citizens with the right to consider their appeals within the framework of abstract review by courts of general jurisdiction. A proposal has also been formulated on granting the right to appeal for the protection of the rights of citizens and their associations within the framework of the Russian Code of Administrative Procedure (CAP), the Commissioner for Human Rights in Russian Federation, the Commissioner for Children’s Rights, the Commissioner for the Rights of Business-Owners, and also the other Commissioners for these areas on the subjects of the Russian Federation, and the deputies of all levels – from municipal to federal. The author states that with the adoption of the CAP, the problem of checking federal regulations that have less legal force than Decrees of the Government of the Russian Federation for compliance with the Russian Constitution has not been resolved. It is suggested vesting the courts of general jurisdiction with the right to exercise administrative and judicial control over compliance of such acts with the Russian Constitution. The article reveals the problem of lack of terminological unity in the legal regulation of similar institutions of constitutional and administrative judicial review. The need to unify a number of norms of constitutional and administrative legislation on regulatory control issue is emphasized.


2019 ◽  
pp. 49-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. E. Belova ◽  
L. G. Vorona-Slivinskaya ◽  
E. V. Voskresenskaya

The presented study aims to examine the current state and development prospects of self-regulation in the Russian construction industry.Aim. The study aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the current state and development prospects of self-regulation as an institution of public administration, identify the problems of self-regulation in the construction industry, and formulate proposals on solving the identified problems.Tasks. The authors complete the following tasks to achieve the set aim: examine the regulatory framework of the activities of self-regulatory organizations in the construction industry — construction, design, and engineering surveying; analyze the current state and positive trends of self-regulation in the field of construction; identify problems in the activities of self-regulatory organizations in the construction industry — construction, design, and engineering surveying — and development prospects of the examined alternative to government regulation.Methods. The methodological basis of the study comprises the fundamental provisions of the modern economic theory, theories of public and municipal administration and legal sciences. The information base includes regulatory and legal acts of the Russian Federation on self-regulation in the construction industry, data from the State Register of Self-Regulatory Organizations, and statistics in the field of construction.Results. At the current stage of development of self-regulation in the construction industry, the most efficient mechanism for this institution involves guaranteed compensation for damage caused due to shortcomings in the works and services during construction, renovation, capital repairs of construction objects, engineering surveying, design. The victims should be compensated not out of insurance payments under civil insurance contracts, but rather out of the compensation funds of self-regulatory organizations.Conclusion. This study makes it possible to assess the institution of self-regulation in the construction industry — construction, design, and engineering surveying — as an efficient institution for proper protection of the interests of consumers of construction works and services and those of the government. 


2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg Weeks

Soft law is a pervasive phenomenon which is highly effective as a means of regulation in Australia, as it is in many other jurisdictions. This article will not focus on the regulatory aspects of soft law, but will examine the capacity of individuals to obtain remedies where public authorities fail to adhere to the terms of their published soft law. The available judicial remedies apply in very limited circumstances, both in private law actions (in tort or equity) and public law (judicial review) actions. Ultimately, the most effective ways to remedy breaches of soft law appear also to be ‘soft’, such as recommendations of the Ombudsman and discretionary schemes for ex gratia payments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document