A Tale of Two Enforcement Venues: Determinants and Consequences of the SEC's Choice of Enforcement Venue After the Dodd-Frank Act

The Dodd-Frank Act allows the SEC to choose either an administrative proceeding or a federal court as an enforcement venue for resolving violations of federal securities laws. I examine the determinants and consequences of the SEC's choice of enforcement venue after the Dodd-Frank Act. Results show that material cases are 28% - 35% more likely to be assigned to federal courts, and politically connected defendants are about 14% more likely to be routed to administrative proceedings. While monetary penalties by venue are statistically indifferent, politically connected defendants in administrative proceedings are associated with lower penalties. Additionally, I find that administrative proceedings process cases 27 times faster than federal courts. Results suggest that the SEC's private incentives affect enforcement venue selection and possibly enforcement outcomes. SEC is more likely to use administrative proceedings when political and economic costs are greater, and use federal courts when political and economic benefits are greater.

Principle of Proportionality and The Principle of Reasonableness

This paper examines a principle of particular relevance for administrative action and the concept of good administration, namely the principle of reasonableness, at the EU level, from the point of view of the Italian administrative doctrine, and jurisprudence of the Council of State. Specific attention will be paid to the many faces and functions of reasonableness, in administrative proceeding as well as in judicial review of discretion, and its connection with the idea of proportionality. Moreover, this article will discuss the influence and effects of the application of general principles of EU law on the Italian legal order. Finally, it will describe the EU principle of reasonableness has influenced the Italian administrative (case) law. This article aims to show that on the one hand the European principles of reasonableness and proportionality seem to be smoothly absorbed in the Italian administrative case law; on the other, the Europeanisation process still encounters resistance from a part of the Italian doctrine that persists in categorizing reasonableness as a principle different from proportionality.

Are there Grounds for Appeal of a Court Ruling According to Art. 200, Paragraph (1) of the Code of Administrative Procedure by an Administrative Authority which has issued an Administrative Act?

The present article discusses the question: are there grounds for appeal of a court ruling according to Art. 200, Paragraph (1) of the Code of Administrative Procedure by an administrative authority which has issued an administrative act. The author analyzes the administrative proceeding, stipulated in Section IV of Chapter 10 of the Code of Administrative Procedure. The article considers the purpose of appeal of refusal to consider request for issuance of administrative act. The article also answers the question posed in Interpretative Case No 10/2019 of the Supreme Administrative Court.

MEDIATION IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING: MYTH OR REALITY NOWADAYS

In legal life of the modern world common ways of resolution to the legal disputes (conflicts) are not always efficient, since, as a rule, interests and needs of the one side and sometimes even of the both ones are left unsatisfied. Appeal to the public authorities because of each law conflict results in overloading of courts and administrative authorities. Implementation of other alternative ways of resolution of legal disputes, for example, such as mediation, can be an option to improvement of justice access and to reduction of court overloading. The article is devoted to reviewing the peculiarities of implementation of the method of mediation in administrative proceeding. It reports on attributes of administrative law conflict and also on peculiarities of conducting the procedure of mediation. Scholarly works of domestic scientists such as Sydelnikov O. D., Krasilovska Z. V., Lysko A., Mazaraki N. A. and others have been devoted to this problematique. Mediation - is a consensual and confidential procedure extrajudicial settlements of conflicts, in which a mediator helps the sides to understand their interests and search efficient ways of achieving mutually acceptable solution. The sphere of administrative disputes is the most difficult for implementation of mediation procedure. It is specified by typical peculiarities for such disputes and also by legal nature of subjects of administrative legal relationship. Exactly because of this, some scientists refer to partial nonmediability of such disputes, as one of the side in this case is always an organ of public authority. Approaching a compromise between public authority and a citizen is a prioritized direction of state and local authority activity. The procedure of mediation can be applied only in certain administrative disputes. In this case it is possible to single out advantages of implementation of the mediation procedure in dealing with administrative law conflict, they are effectiveness, saving funds and time, speed, confidentiality, unloading administrative courts, embodiment the principle of service conception of the state, the principle of the rule of law and proper management.

THE PROCEDURE OF LAND PLOTS OWNERSHIP ALLOTMENT IN TERMS OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING STRUCTURE

The article is devoted to the analysis of administrative proceedings structure concerning the ownership of land plots, which are implemented in the local government authorities’ activity process. The theoretical basis of the article are the traditional for the science of administrative law views upon administrative process and administrative proceedings gist and content, as well as the views upon the administrative process structure in terms of such its feature as staging. It is shown that the difficulty of administrative proceedings structure determining on free land plots ownership for citizens is that each of its stages has features of separate administrative proceedings. This is a proceeding for granting permission for the development of a land management project as for land allotment, a proceeding for the development and approval of a land management project for the land plot allotment, a procedure for approving a land management project and providing a land plot for ownership. It is suggested to refer to such proceedings as “stage proceedings” or “sub-proceedings”. Stage proceedings or sub-proceedings can be defined as a substantively separated, time-bound and logically related set of procedural actions that, in the aggregate, constitute independent administrative proceeding within the framework of higher-level administrative proceeding. A characteristic feature of sub-proceeding is that they are implemented in a clearly defined sequence and have no independent value beyond the general administrative proceeding for the land plots ownership granting. The procedural purpose of each sub-proceeding is related to the ultimate procedural purpose of the general administrative proceeding. Each of the sub-proceedings results in the adoption of an administrative act, namely the decision of the local council to grant permission for the development of land management for allotment of land plot; act of the land management project approval by the executive power authorized body; the decision of the local council to approve the project of land management and allotment of the land plot in ownership. It is concluded that there is no stage of decision execution for the provision of land plots in the administrative proceedings structure, since the decision of the local council as for approval of land management project on the land allotment and the provision of the land plot to the property do not require activity for its implementation. The legal consequences of this decision arise automatically and consist in the person’s having ownership of the land plot. As for the subsequent registration of ownership right, it is carried out according to independent administrative registration proceeding.

Naprawienie szkody spowodowanej ograniczeniem korzystania z nieruchomości w związku z ochroną przyrody – wybrane zagadnienia

<p>Establishing legal forms of nature conservation entails a restriction on the right of ownership and other property rights. For this reason, the legislature introduced in the Act of 27 April 2001 on Environmental Protection Law solutions allowing for the purchase of real estate or payment of damages. The provisions of the Environmental Protection Law set out an administrative-judicial procedure of claiming for remedying a damage caused by the legal operation of the public administration related to the protection of environmental resources. This procedure is based on the fact that a claim, essentially of a civil nature (a claim for remedying a damage caused by restricting the use of property) is pursued in two stages – the first in an administrative proceeding in which the administrative authority issues a decision and in the second, where the case is decided by a general court. The first stage is obligatory, in the sense that in the event of a dispute for compensation, the aggrieved party must apply to the administrative body for compensation. The second is initiated as a result of the action of the party dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the administrative body.</p>