Procedural Rights in Lithuanian Administrative Law – Resistance Fuelled by the Past?

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-183
Author(s):  
Agno Andrijauskaito
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
The Past ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Practical Implications

Despite the prevailing trend towards the codification of administrative procedures on the European plane – both on supranational and domestic levels –, the Lithuanian legal system stays immune to it. The purpose of this article is, hence, to explore the underlying reasons for the said resistance towards a clear enunciation of procedural rights on statutory level as well as its more practical implications in Lithuania. Namely, the main focus lies on the analysis of the said deficiencies as reflected by the administrative case law. In order to reach this goal, firstly, the (somewhat limited) notion of administrative procedure found in the legal framework of Lithuania is dissected and compared to respective notions found in few other legal systems of EU Member States boasting more comprehensive codifications of administrative procedure. Secondly, the relevant administrative case law in which the paradigmatic examples of procedural rights (such as the right to be heard and access to one's file) can be found is analysed. In the end, the reasons of the said resistance towards codification of procedural rights in the Lithuanian legal system are offered together with a reflection on whether that can still be justified in view of the results revealed by the case law analysis, or whether the time to innovate has come and the more coherent and logically-organized system of administrative procedure is needed.

scholarly journals In the name of the public: Representatives of collective and wider interest of the public in administrative matters in Serbia

Pravni zapisi ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 504-531
Author(s):  
Jelena Jerinić
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Interested Party ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Active Approach ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Direct Indication ◽  
Administrative Procedures

Serbian Law on General Administrative Procedure (LGAP) opened a possibility for broadening the standing in administrative procedures and administrative disputes, by inclusion of subjects representing collective interests and interest of the wider public - primarily, citizen associations and similar organizations. However, by failing to regulate a series of concrete issues, the Law places the administration and the Administrative Court before a challenge, demanding from them an extensive interpretation of not only LGAP's provisions, but other legislation already recognizing such organizations as AIDS in realization of the public interest. The author analyzes relevant legislation, as well as available administrative and court caselaw in search of these answers. The lack of explicit legal provisions could be balanced by a creative approach in practice, especially by the Administrative Court. Having in mind comparative solutions, the question arises whether it is necessary to regulate this category of potential parties separately or to link it more explicitly to the already existing notion of an interested party. Instead, completely new notions have been introduced - collective interests and the wider interests of the public - which are not or not consistently defined in Serbian law. The current, not so voluminous case law, shows that the administrative bodies need a more direct indication of the rules, i.e. a more explicit definitions of these terms. However, despite the restrictive legal framework, administrative bodies should be open to understanding the specific circumstances, i.e. the motivation that an organization has when it seeks standing. In the normative sphere, one of the solutions could be to envisage the analogous application of LGAP's provisions on the interested party. Other solutions could be sought in explicitly mentioning them in the provisions on right to appeal. The current formulations of LGAP do not provide sufficient guidance to the administration and an extensive interpretation would be a great challenge for them. An active approach of the Administrative Court could show the way for the administration toward and effective application of these provisions of LGAP.

The Requirements and Limits of the Codification of Administrative Procedures in Slovenia According to European Trends

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 427-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Polonca Kovač
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
Special Rules ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights

In regulating administrative procedures, legislators at the national and European levels should devote special attention to the codification of procedural rights in administrative relations that are recognized as European principles of good administration. Furthermore, there is a normative issue to be addressed between a more or less centralized general codification, with common minimum standards applying in any kind of administrative relation, and the admissibility of special procedural rules adapted to the specifics of individual administrative areas. A comparative analysis of the Slovenian General Administrative Procedure Act and eu standards regarding principles of administrative procedures is conducted in order to identify the role of principles, such as the right to be heard, the right of access to information, and the right to legal protection, on the national level. An additional analysis of the case law of the Slovenian Constitutional Court shows that the general codification of respective procedural rights is indispensable in pursuing the principle of the equal protection of rights. The Slovenian case can serve as a model for other, especially Eastern European, countries. The author argues that there is a need for general codification, which should not be overly detailed, but which should still serve the basic objectives of administrative procedures, namely ensuring substantive rights and the most important legal interests of the parties, in addition to guaranteeing effective protection of the public interest. At the same time, special rules should be allowed as exceptions in order to regulate sector-specific aspects, while nonetheless ensuring that such rules remain in compliance with European and constitutional procedural principles.

Does the Injunction Gap Violate Implementers’ Fair Trial Rights Under the ECHR?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léon E Dijkman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Validity Of A Patent

Abstract Germany is one of few jurisdictions with a bifurcated patent system, under which infringement and validity of a patent are established in separate proceedings. Because validity proceedings normally take longer to conclude, it can occur that remedies for infringement are imposed before a decision on the patent’s validity is available. This phenomenon is colloquially known as the ‘injunction gap’ and has been the subject of increasing criticism over the past years. In this article, I examine the injunction gap from the perspective of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I find that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting this provision supports criticism of the injunction gap, because imposing infringement remedies with potentially far-reaching consequences before the validity of a patent has been established by a court of law arguably violates defendants’ right to be heard. Such reliance on the patent office’s grant decision is no longer warranted in the light of contemporary invalidation rates. I conclude that the proliferation of the injunction gap should be curbed by an approach to a stay of proceedings which is in line with the test for stays as formulated by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court. Under this test, courts should stay infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court or the EPO’s Board of Appeal have ruled on the validity of a patent whenever it is more likely than not that it will be invalidated.

scholarly journals THE ROLE OF JUDICIAL PRACTICE IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM: RUSSIAN EXPERIENCE IN THE WORLD CONTEXT

2017 ◽  
pp. 40-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Виктор Момотов ◽  
Viktor Momotov
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Anglo American

In Russian legal science there is a wide-spread belief according to which legal precedents are not sources of Russian law, because Russian legal system forms a part of continental legal system. Various researchers believe that judicial practice does not contain legal norms and consequently case law is not a component of Russian legal framework. The present paper contains the theoretical and historical legal research of the place and role of case law in Anglo-American and continental legal systems. It’s shown that for long historical periods legal precedents were recognized as sources of law not only in Great Britain and the USA, but also in major European legal systems, while at the present time differentiation of legal systems with respect to their attitude towards case law is becoming outdated. Furthermore, based on the research of various legal scholars’ traditions (principally of the positivistic and the sociological traditions) this article demonstrates that negative attitude towards case law is largely determined by the formalistic and obsolete understanding of the term ”source of law”, coming from the misinterpretation of positivism. The paper also presents the current development trends of case law as a source of law. In particular the article outlines the proactive interpretations of new statutory provisions issued by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the global uniqueness of such interpretations and the influence of scientific–technological progress and public needs on the highest court’s interpretations. The mutual interference of case law and statutory law is shown.

A Critique of Legal Framework Facilitating Access to Government Information in Tanzania

2015 ◽  
pp. 1737-1762
Author(s):  
John Ubena
Keyword(s):  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Universal Access ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Government Information ◽  
The Media ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right

This chapter provides a critical analysis of the legal framework for access to information particularly information held by government in Tanzania. The analysis intends to establish whether the existing Right To Information (RTI) legal framework and ICT development in Tanzania facilitates universal and requisite access to government information. In order to do that, the chapter utilises a literature review to understand contemporary trends in both theory and practice. In addition, journal articles, books, reports, case law, and pieces of legislation focusing on RTI are visited to obtain deeper insights in the topic under scrutiny. The findings indicate that, despite Tanzania's efforts to embrace democracy virtues, good governance, and technology, the country lacks adequate legal framework to facilitate universal access to government information and ensure that the Right To Information (RTI) is observed in all the socio-economic contexts. To rectify this problem, there is need to enact the RTI law with clear focus of encouraging access to government information. Although two bills (the Media Service Bill [MSB] and the 2011 RTI) are currently being debated, it is not clear yet when they will become law and subsequently practiced.

Part I Rationales for State Aid Rules, 4 The Legal Framework to Subsidies and State Aid Review

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kreuschitz Viktor ◽  
Nehl Hanns Peter
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Great Influence ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
State Aid ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Procedural Rights

This chapter assesses the legal framework of the multi-level system of State aid and subsidies control not only on the level of the EU but also on the international level—the World Trade Organization (WTO)—and the national level by EU Member States. The control of subsidies and State aids as a multi-level phenomenon has been a laboratory of design solutions for procedural law provisions, enforcement techniques, and the development of general principles of law. It is one of the fields of law which has been most influential for the development of modern public law as a multi-level legal system with several constitutionalized levels. Not only by the sheer force of numbers and issues raised, State aid and subsidies cases have had a great influence on the development of procedural rights such as defence rights. It also added to the clarification of notions of discretion, the protection of legitimate interests, and principles of equality.

EU Sanctions

2021 ◽  
pp. 177-229
Author(s):  
Jan Wouters ◽  
Frank Hoffmeister ◽  
Geert De Baere ◽  
Thomas Ramopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Property A ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Large Corpus ◽  
The Eu

This chapter provides an overview of the sanctions that are available to the EU in the conduct of its foreign policy. First, it focuses on EU restrictive measures or sanctions analysing the applicable provisions and procedure for their adoption under the EU Treaties before making a systematic presentation of the different regimes adopted by the Union and their link to UN sanctions. The chapter also delves into the large corpus of case law on the compliance of sanctions with fundamental rights, in particular procedural rights, such as the rights of defence and the right to effective judicial protection, and substantive rights, such as the right to carry out an economic activity and right to property. A section is also dedicated to the constantly developing case law on actions for damages from sanctions. Sanctions adopted by the Union within the framework of cooperation and association agreements for the violation of certain essential elements of these agreements are also analysed. Lastly, a discussion of the specific case of the blocking statute, an autonomous measure adopted to counter extraterritorial effects of legislation and actions of third states, which was recently updated, forms part of this chapter.

scholarly journals Using Arbitration for Resolving Foreign Investment Disputes: A Comparative Study of Laws on Arbitration in Ghana and China

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley Ayangbah
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Foreign Investment ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Comparative Manner

<p>International Investment in recent times is seen as one of the fastest-developing areas of international law. In the past decades, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of bilateral investment treaties and other agreements with investment related provisions that grant foreign investors important substantive and procedural rights, including, most importantly, the right to sue individuals, organizations and even the state hosting their investment for violations of customary international law and treaty obligations. Dispute becomes an inevitable phenomenon as individuals, organizations and countries continue to engage in foreign investment and as such there is the need for dispute solving mechanism to resolve such disputes as and when they arises. Even though there are several dispute solving mechanisms, arbitration seems to be a well-established and widely used mechanism to end dispute probably due to the efficiency and flexibility nature of it. The laws governing arbitration differ from one country to the other and it is for this reason that investors need to be abreast with the different arbitration laws  so as to enable them make inform decisions as to whether to resort to arbitration  or not. This paper analyses the arbitration laws of The Republic of Ghana and Peoples Republic of China in a comparative manner by drawing on the similarities and difference with respect to arbitration laws and procedure in these two countries. The paper is divided into three parts. The first part of this paper gives a brief background as well as the characteristics of the concept of arbitration. The second part looks as the similarities and difference of arbitration between the selected countries, and the final part looks at the arbitration phase and post arbitration phase of the two countries.</p>

Independent Development of Israeli Law

1975 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 515-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Friedmann
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
The Past ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
Local Law ◽  
English Law

It is not always easy to decide when we must turn to English law. And once it has been determined that reference to English law is appropriate, there is the further question of the substance and application of principles drawn from English law. In such case, English law forms part of the local law, and need not be ascertained as required by the rules of private international law in respect of foreign law.This makes the local law directly dependent upon English case-law, which itself is constantly being renewed and developed. Such dependence may seem to impair the independence of the Israeli legal system. The question could not, of course, be raised during the Mandatory period at a time when there existed a possibility of appeal from the Mandatory Supreme Court to the Privy Council in Westminster. But after the establishment of the State Cheshin J. said:It is unthinkable that a sovereign nation with its own laws and its own legal system would continue to be subject to the authority of a foreign nation's legal system and to changes in rulings which are likely to be introduced in her courts, only because in the past, when there was a strong tie between the two nations, the former drew from the legal system of the latter.

scholarly journals Preparation of a Legislative Proposal in the Multilingual Legal System of the European Union

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-50
Author(s):  
Anna Doliwa-Klepacka
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Language Version ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legislative Proposal ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The principle of multilingualism in the legal system of the European Union is one of the key elements that guarantees, among others, the right of access to EU legislation. It is particularly important not only in the sphere of the direct application of the EU law, but also in the sphere of access to information during the lawmaking procedures at the EU institutions. A special case is, however, a stage of preparing a draft legislative proposal by the European Commission. The EU member states agree to limit the use of official language version to the working documents for “working” languages of the Commission, i.e. English, French and German. In practice, English and French are the most widely used languages for the working arrangements in the preparation of the draft legislation, mainly due to costs of the necessary translations and an effectiveness of this stage. This article presents a course of the stage of the drafting a legislative proposal by the Commission and illustrates the scope of work partly exempted from the obligation to ensure the full application of the principle of equivalence of all the official languages of the European Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document