Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Lithuania

2021 ◽  
pp. 69-71
Author(s):  
Agnė Andrijauskaitė
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
General Rule ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
The Law ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

This chapter reviews administrative procedure and judicial review in Lithuania. The introduction of administrative justice into the Lithuanian legal system happened against the backdrop of Lithuania's 'unflinching' desire to join the European Union and was meant to strengthen the protection of individual rights and administrative accountability. Two cornerstone acts in this regard, the Law on Public Administration and the Law on Administrative Proceedings (APA), were adopted in 1999. Administrative courts were also established in the same year. Article 3 (1) APA spells out the general rule that administrative courts settle disputes arising in the domain of the public administration. All the acts and measures excluded from the competence of administrative courts are listed in Article 18 APA, which establishes the so-called negative competence of administrative courts. Meanwhile, Article 91 (1) (3) APA provides that the impugned administrative decision may be quashed if 'essential procedural rules intended to ensure objective and reasonable adoption of an administrative decision were breached'.

La incidencia de la Ley del Procedimiento Administrativo Común de las Administraciones Públicas sobre la potestad normativa local

2017 ◽  
pp. 87-141
Author(s):  
Lucía CASADO CASADO
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Legislative Initiative ◽  
The Law ◽  
Regulatory Evaluation ◽  
Regulatory Powers ◽  
Laws And Regulations

LABURPENA: Ekonomiako Lankidetza eta Garapenerako Erakundeak eta Europar Batasunak bultzatutako erregulazioa hobetzeko politika gero eta gehiago garatu da Espainian eta 2015ean bultzada esanguratsua jaso du, urriaren 1eko 39/2015 Legea, Herri Administrazioen Administrazio Prozedura Erkideari buruzkoa, onartuta. Lege horrek titulu berria dakar —VI.a— legegintza-ekinbidea eta erregelamenduak eta bestelako xedapenak emateko ahalmena arautzeko. Bertan, legegintza-ekinbidea eta lege mailako arauak egiteko ahala erabiltzeari, erregelamenduak egiteko ahala erabiltzeari, erregulazio onaren printzipioei, araudiaren ebaluazioari, arauen publizitateari, arauen plangintzari eta herritarrek lege mailako arauak eta erregelamenduak egiteko prozeduran parte hartzeari buruzko xedapen batzuk jasotzen dira. Lan horrek arlo horretan 39/2015 Legeak sartutako berritasunak aztertzen ditu, tokiko ikuspegitik, haren xedapenak administrazio publiko guztiei eta, beraz, toki-administrazioei ere, aplikatzen baitzaizkie. Helburu nagusia Legeak tokiko arauak egiteko ahalean daukan eragina aztertzea eta, ondorioz, arlo horretan tokiko eremuan sartzen diren berritasun nagusiak zehaztea da, haren aplikazioak ekar ditzakeen erronka, arazo eta zalantza batzuk ikusteko eta balizko irtenbideak emateko. RESUMEN: La política de mejora de la regulación, impulsada por la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico y por la Unión Europea, se ha desarrollado en España de forma reciente y ha recibido un impulso significativo en 2015, con la aprobación de la Ley 39/2015, de 1 de octubre, del procedimiento administrativo común de las administraciones públicas. Esta Ley incluye un nuevo Título —el VI—, destinado a regular la iniciativa legislativa y la potestad para dictar reglamentos y otras disposiciones. En él se recogen algunas previsiones sobre el ejercicio de la iniciativa legislativa y la potestad para dictar normas con rango de ley, el ejercicio de la potestad reglamentaria, los principios de buena regulación, la evaluación normativa, la publicidad de las normas, la planificación normativa y la participación de los ciudadanos en el procedimiento de elaboración de normas con rango de ley y reglamentos. Este trabajo se centra en el análisis de las novedades incorporadas en esta materia por la citada Ley 39/2015 desde una perspectiva local, dada la aplicación de sus previsiones a todas las administraciones públicas y, por consiguiente, también a las administraciones locales. El objetivo primordial es analizar la incidencia de esta Ley sobre la potestad normativa local y, en consecuencia, determinar las principales novedades que se incorporan en esta materia en el ámbito local, con el fin de apuntar algunos retos, problemas e incertidumbres que su aplicación puede suscitar y aportar posibles soluciones. ABSTRACT: Policies to improve regulation promoted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the European Union have recently been applied in Spain and in 2015 received a significant boost with the passing of Law 39/2015, of 1 October, on common administrative procedure for the public administrations. This Law includes a new Section (VI) which regulates legislative initiative and the power to create regulations and other provisions. The law contains provisions regarding the execution of legislative initiative and the power to create regulations with the force of laws, the exercising of regulatory power, the principles of good regulation, regulatory evaluation, regulatory publicity, regulatory planning and the participation of citizens in the process of creating legislation with the force of laws and regulations. The present study analyses the changes made to local regulatory powers by the aforementioned Law 39/2015, given that its provisions are applicable to all public administrations and, therefore, also to the local administrations. The primary objective is to analyse the effect of this Law on local regulatory powers and, therefore, to determine the principle new changes that have been made to local regulatory powers, with the aim of identifying the challenges, problems and uncertainties that may arise through the application of the Law and to propose possible solutions.

scholarly journals Sądowa kontrola decyzji organów podatkowych w sprawach ulg w spłacie zobowiązań podatkowych opartych na uznaniu administracyjnym

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 441
Author(s):  
Andrzej Niezgoda
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Administrative Discretion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Tax Relief ◽  
The Law ◽  
Administrative Courts

<p>The article is of a scientific-research nature. The author discusses the problem of limits of judicial review of discretionary decisions made by taxation authorities, which aim at applying relief in payments of tax liabilities under Polish regulations and case-law of administrative courts. It may be noted that despite the issue of administrative discretion being discussed in the academic literature, the question of limits of judicial review in the practice of administrative courts still raises doubts. It is therefore reasonable to undertake the analysis of the main views formulated in the literature and the case-law of administrative courts addressing this problem, from the point of view of the limits of judicial review of discretionary decisions. The thesis of the article is that the nature of discretionary decisions on relief in payment of tax liabilities, determined by the function of administrative discretion, and, at the same time, the criteria set out in the law for judicial review of public administration, limit the role of the administrative court in examining the compliance with procedural law of the tax proceedings preceding the issuance of such a decision and the respecting by tax authorities of the fundamental values of the system of law expressed in the Polish Constitution. This is because they define the limits of administrative discretion, within which the choice of one of the possible solutions remains beyond the judicial review of the public administration. For the law, as it stands (<em>de lege lata</em>) there are no grounds for administrative courts, provided that the tax authorities respect the basic values of the legal system expressed in the Polish Constitution, to formulate assessments as to the circumstances and reasons justifying the granting or refusal to grant a tax relief, or its scope. The concept of internal and external limits of administrative discretion may therefore be useful for administrative court rulings.</p>

Directions of development of administrative courts’ jurisprudence in real property cases in 2020: Selected Aspects (Part I)

2021 ◽  
Vol I (I) ◽  
pp. 109-133
Author(s):  
Anna Dalkowska ◽  
Karol Rzęsiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Capital City ◽  
Official Journal ◽  
Real Property ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

Jurisprudence of administrative courts on various aspects of real property law is extensive and multi- faceted. The main bulk of cases concerns real properties which are subject to the reprivatisation process that, in the absence of final solutions to re-privatisation predicaments and the multi-faceted effects of the Decree of 26 October 1945 on the Ownership and Use of Land Within the Boundaries of the Capital City of Warszawa, hereinafter referred to as the “Warsaw Decree” (promulgated in the official journal “Dziennik Ustaw” of 21 November 1945, No 50, item 279), which remains in force for over seventy years, are often the subject of judicial review of administrative decisions. Administrative court rulings play a significant role in real property cases and set the directions for future decisions by public administration bodies. The analysis of judicial rulings in real property cases will be limited to selected problems, which, given differing interpretations, are the cause of discrepancies in judicial decisions in administrative courts. This paper, which is the first part of the study, covers jurisprudence on the premise of death of a party during administrative proceedings, which has an impact on the potential invalidity of a decision and its ex tunc effects as well as the status of a party in real property proceedings.

Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in France

2021 ◽  
pp. 50-52
Author(s):  
Delphine Costa
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Judicial Remedy ◽  
Individual Decisions ◽  
Laws And Regulations ◽  
Administrative Justice

This chapter describes administrative procedure and judicial review in France. In French public law, no constitutional provision provides for judicial review of administrative measures. Nor is there a convention providing for judicial review of administrative measures. This is only envisaged by the laws and regulations, in particular the Administrative Justice Code and the Code of Relations between the Public and the Administration. The administrative courts exercise extensive control over the acts or measures of the public administration, including both individual decisions and regulatory acts, but some are nonetheless beyond judicial review. Where an act or measure is contested on procedural grounds, judicial review takes place only under certain conditions: the procedural defect must have deprived the applicant of a guarantee or it must have influenced the meaning of the decision taken. Two types of judicial remedy exist in administrative law: it is therefore up to the applicant to limit their application before the administrative judge.

Towards the Integration of E-Government Process in the University of Murcia

2015 ◽  
pp. 107-123
Author(s):  
Jesús D. Jiménez Re ◽  
M. Antonia Martínez-Carreras
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Agile Processes ◽  
Service Oriented ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
Automated Process ◽  
The University

Several countries are adopting e-government strategies for adapting the administrative procedures to automated process with the aim of obtaining efficient and agile processes. In this sense, the European Union has published some directives which indicate the need for European countries to adopt e-government in the public administration. Additionally, the Spanish government has published laws and documents for supporting the adoption of e-government in the different public administration. Concretely, the University of Murcia has developed a strategy for the adoption of e-government using a service-oriented platform. Indeed, this strategy has evolved for the adoption of BPM for its administrative processes. The aim of this chapter is explaining the strategy for the adoption of business processes in the University of Murcia.

Public Administration, Turbulence, and the European Union

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Multilevel Governance ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Uncertain Environments ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Public ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Regulatory Challenges

In a multilevel governance system such as the European Union (EU) policy processes at one level may create challenges and dilemmas at lower levels. Multilevel governance involves a multiplicity of regulatory regimes and succeeding governance ambiguities for national actors. These regulatory challenges and ensuring governance dilemmas increasingly affect contemporary European public administration. These challenges and dilemmas are captured by the term turbulence. The inherent state prerogative to formulate and implement public policy is subject to an emergent and turbulent EU administration. Organized turbulence is captured by the supply of independent and integrated bureaucratic capacities at a “European level.” Throughout history (1952 onwards) the EU system has faced shifting hostile and uncertain environments, and responded by erecting turbulent organizational solutions of various kinds. Studying turbulence opens an opportunity to rethink governance in turbulent administrative systems such as the public administration of the EU.

scholarly journals Assessing the Public Administration’s Intention in EU Economic Law: Chasing Ghosts or Dressing Windows?

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 93-121
Author(s):  
Albert SANCHEZ-GRAELLS
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Economic Law ◽  
Right To Good Administration ◽  
State Liability

AbstractHere I reflect on the role of subjective or intentional elements in EU economic law prohibitions, particularly in relation to rules concerning public administration. From a normative perspective, it is desirable to suppress the need for an assessment of subjective intent and to proceed with an objectified enforcement of such prohibitions. With this in view, I consider public procurement and Member State aid rules as two examples of areas of EU economic law subjected to interpretative and enforcement difficulties due to the introduction – sometimes veiled – of subjective elements in their main prohibitions. I establish parallels with other areas of EU economic law – such as antitrust, non-discrimination law and the common agricultural policy – and seek benchmarks to support the main thesis that such intentional elements need to be ‘objectified’, so that EU economic law can be enforced against the public administration to an adequate standard of legal certainty. This mirrors the development of the doctrine of abuse of EU law, where a similar ‘objectification’ in the assessment of subjective elements has taken place.I draw on the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union to support such ‘objectification’ and highlight how the Court has been engaging in such interpretative strategy for some time. The paper explores the interplay between this approach and more general protections against behaviour of the public administration in breach of EU law: the right to good administration in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the doctrine of State liability for infringement of EU law. I conclude with the normative recommendation that the main prohibitions of EU economic law should be free from subjective elements focused on the intention of the public administration.

scholarly journals Legislation on Administrative Procedures: The German Experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-215
Author(s):  
A. D. Maile
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
General Order ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
Administrative Act ◽  
The Law

This article provides an overview of the main provisions of German administrative procedural law. It outlines in a systematic way the particularities of administrative procedures and the possibilities for a citizen to seek administrative remedy. The essence of the basic principles of administrative procedural law as well as the particularities of temporary legal protection and the possibilities for an extrajudicial appeal against an administrative act are explained to the reader. The Author points out that administrative proceedings in Germany are, in a broad sense, any decision-making activity of a public administration body. According to the German Administrative Procedure Act, an administrative procedure in the sense of the law is an externally imposed activity of the administrative authorities that is aimed at verifying the conditions, preparing and issuing an administrative act or entering into a public-law contract. At the same time, the activities of a public administration body are not bound by a specific form, unless there are specific rules on the form of procedure. It is stated that current German administrative law distinguishes between an administrative act and a general order. The latter is also an administrative act, the range of addressees, however, is wider. An administrative act according to the law is any order, decision or other authoritative action of an administrative body aimed at regulating a single case in the field of public law and having direct legal consequences of an external nature. A general order is an administrative act, which is addressed to a certain or defined by general features, or which concerns the public-law properties of a thing or the use of it by the public. The author notes that an administrative act must be specific in content, justified and announced to the participants in the proceedings. As long as the act has not been declared, it is invalid. An administrative act is valid from the moment it is announced, unless it itself provides otherwise. It continues in force until it is revoked, cancelled, terminated by a deadline or for any other reason specified in the law. Based on the analysis, it is concluded that the lack of a law on administrative procedures in Russia is a negative indicator of the modern Russian administrative legal system.

scholarly journals ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: TOWARDS A COMMON MODEL OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE

2019 ◽  
pp. 87-107
Author(s):  
Estanislao Arana García
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Anglo Saxon ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Creative Solutions ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
Near Future

Purpose. The aim of this paper is to analyse the activity of the European agencies as a mechanism of control prior to the judicial review. This procedure is carried out by independent and impartial administrative tribunals. This model supposes to create specialized administrative organs that solve conflicts previous to the judicial procedure. The “agencies model” is mainly used in western countries with legal Anglo-Saxon reminiscences. In this paper we analyze the importance of these agencies and its possibilities for improvement in the near future. Method. To achieve this goal it is necessary to: 1) analysis the creative solutions of the agencies courts; 2) verify the performance of agencies through the information provided by themselves; 3) discuss the judicial decisions from a scientific perspective. This process has been implemented through direct contact with experts and professional actively involved at these European administrative courts. Results. EU law is haphazardly creating a system of administrative review that is in many cases a pre-condition to judicial review. This system is most evidently manifesting itself in the application of EU law by administrative agencies. For this purpose, some of the EU’s most important agencies have created specialised bodies known as boards of appeal. These objective and independent bodies have the power to review the decisions of the agency they form part on based on both questions of law and fact. The paper aims to establish a critical vision of the role that new judicial forms are developing and the importance of to reach a specialized criterion for solving technically increasingly complex issues. Conclusions. The board-of-appeal model has proven a successful one as it offers parties a low-cost and effective way of having their complaints resolved without having to go to the European Union Court of Justice. Lastly, there appears to be a need for the European Union to, as it is currently doing with administrative procedure, establish a common set of rules for this emerging remedy for reviewing European administrative acts.

scholarly journals Mediator w postępowaniu administracyjnym

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1 (4)) ◽  
pp. 117-131
Author(s):  
Wiktor Trybka
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Mediation Process ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Case Files ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights

Amending the Code of Administrative Procedure, the legislator decided to introduce the possibility of conducting mediation proceedings. A mediator may be a natural person who has full legal capacity and exercises full civil rights. The mediator’s role is to ensure the conduct of the mediation process. They have the responsibility to stimulate the initiative of the parties by means of appropriate mediation techniques, as well as to create an appropriate climate of conversation, based on mutual trust and respect. The mediator uses procedural rights, which include: the right to read the case files and the right to remuneration and reimbursement of expenses related to mediation. The Code of Administrative Procedure also imposes procedural obligations on the mediator: it must maintain impartiality in the conduct of mediation and draw up a report on mediation. Participants in the mediation are also parties of the administrative proceedings and a public administration body. The task of the public administration body is to determine whether the arrangements made by the parties with the participation of the mediator fall within the scope of the generally applicable law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document