Source: https://text.123doc.org/document/5085887-wellerdt-organisation-of-banking-regulation-2015.htm
Timestamp: 2018-11-21 03:26:40
Document Index: 472749503

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§ 7', '§ 6', 'Art 288', '§ 3', '§ 1', '§ 3', '§ 1', '§ 4', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 13', '§ 10', '§ 108', '§ 1', '§ 79', '§ 7', '§ 108', '§ 79', '§ 13', '§ 79', '§ 108', '§ 7', '§ 10', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 10', '§ 16', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 10']

Wellerdt organisation of banking regulation (2015) - Tài liệu text
Wellerdt organisation of banking regulation (2015)
Organisation of Banking
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-17638-3
Library of Congress Control Number: 2015936292
The following study on the organisation of banking regulation has arisen during a
stay at the Deutsche Bundesbank from August to October 2014. Further developments of the legal framework and monetary policies could be taken into consideration until February 2015.
I would like at this point put on record my gratefulness for the support provided
by colleagues and friends and their willingness to engage in vivid dialogues.
First, I offer my sincerest gratitude to Dr. Daniel Rau and Dr. Christian Heidfeld
of the Deutsche Bundesbank, who took an active part in discussing—critically and
passionately—legal issues on banking regulation.
I also want to thank Prof. Dr. Thomas Wein and his colleagues Dr. Annika Pape
and Mr. Arne Neukirch of the Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre of the University of
Lüneburg for their willingness to communicate and their careful remarks on the
complex interaction of the monetary policy.
I would particularly like to thank Lara Bartels and Bianca Griepe, who greatly
supported this work linguistically.
I thank Springer Verlag and especially Dr. Brigitte Reschke for the inclusion of
this work in the SpringerBriefs in Law series as well as the efﬁcient and professional support of the publication.
Moreover, I thank Dr. Klaus Schleicher for his generous sponsorship of this
Finally, I thank Christiane and Jörg, Lena and Nepomuk as well as Alexander for
your amicable contributions that made work easier and your constant motivation
Lüneburg/Heidelberg, February 2015
1.1 Subject of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Framing of the Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Overview of the Legal Basis of Banking
Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State of Previous Investigations . . . . . . .
1.2 Aim of the Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3 Course of Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Administrative Organisation of Banking Regulation . . . . . . . .
2.1 The Concept of Administrative Organisation . . . . . . . . . .
Organising Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Administering Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Meaning of Administrative Organisation . . . . . . .
2.2 Functions of the Administrative Organisation . . . . . . . . . .
Constitution and Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Meaning of the Administrative Organisation Law .
2.3 Elements of the Administrative Organisation Design . . . . .
Legal Form of the Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Institutions of the Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Purpose of the Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Principles of the Organisation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tasks of the Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Competences of the Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . .
Organisational Relationships. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A Summary of the Elements of Administrative
Organisation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4 The Concept of Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Administration of Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Functions of Administration of Regulation . . . . . . . . . .
Regulation of the Market Access . . . . . . . . . .
Regulation of the Market Behaviour . . . . . . . .
Regulation of the Market Conditions . . . . . . . .
Challenges of the Administration of Regulation . . . . . .
Information as Resource of the Administration
of Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Uncertainties as Characteristics of Banking
Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Need for Knowledge and Knowledge Creation .
Conclusion on the Administrative Organisation
of the Administration of Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Models of the Administration of Banking Regulation . . . . . .
3.1 Parameters to Classify Model Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Historical Development of a Banking Regulation
Sense and Purpose of Banking Regulation . . . . .
3.2 Definition of Model Types of the Administrative
Organisation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3 Model Type 1: Developer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Form of Appearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4 Model Type 2: Processor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5 Model Type 3: Preparer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.6 Model Type 4: Implementer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.7 Model Type 5: Controller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.8 Conclusion: Consequences for the Influence
of Organisations on Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Theses About the Organisation of Banking Regulations . . . . . . . .
4.1 Banking Regulation Follows no Legal Foundation
in the European Treaties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Legal Basis for a Banking Supervision
by the European Central Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Legal Basis for a Banking Regulation
by the European Banking Authority . . . . . . . . . . .
Legal Basis for a Bank Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interim Result for the Legal Basis of Banking
A Banking Supervision by the European Central Bank
Collides with the Target of the Monetary Policy
to Maintain Price Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Link Between Monetary Policy and Price Stability .
Conflict Between Monetary Policy and Banking
Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A National Bank Resolution Due to a European Resolution
Fund Leads to a Communitarisation of Liability . . . . . . . . .
Banking Supervision Collides with the Model of the Union
Law Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Democratically the Banking Regulation Is Only Poorly
Legitimised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Principle of Democratic Legitimisation . . . . . . . . .
Democratic Legitimacy of Independent
Regulatory Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fundamental Weaknesses of the Democratic
Legitimacy of Decisions of Independent
The Regulatory Density of the Institutional Framework
of Regulatory Actors Influences the Organisational Power
of the Regulatory Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Organisational Powers Correlate with the Influence
of Regulatory Actors on Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Does organization matter? Scharpf, Does Organization Matter?
Task Structure and Interaction in the Ministerial Bureaucracy,
Organization and Administrative Sciences (1977), 149.
In the European Composite Administration, the density of material rules increased
in many economic sectors. The application and enforcement of these rules ought to
be administered by formal organisations. “Does organisation matter?” can be
clearly answered favourable. In fact, organisations begin to receive the attention
Administrative organisation is no end in itself. In fact it is required for each
administrative action. In a multi polar, supranational and administrative surrounding the administrative organisation grows in importance in several economic sectors
and life areas. Administrative organisation is regarded as being static and boring—
the opposite is the case. Administrative organisations are influential. They take in
external influences to react flexible to changes in time. Administrative organisations
help to fulﬁl public services at its best.
Thus, this thesis studies the administration and its organisation. The thesis is
based on the “reference area”1 of banking regulation at national, European and
international level. Regulation is one of the youngest dogmatic and most creative
tasks of administration and increasingly presents administrative action. Regulation
leads to a greater need of information to meet diverse consulting and decisionmaking situations of administration. This particularly applies to areas of asymmetric
information between the administration of regulation and regulated economic
sectors. Thereby, administration and its previous organisation are challenged to
develop. Organisation matters!
Coining of the term Schmidt-Aßmann, Das Allgemeine Verwaltungsrecht als Ordnungsidee, 2nd
ed. (Springer, 2004); Ch.1.paras.12 et seq. and Ch. 3. paras. 1 et seq.; with the help of a reference
area, a real area of administrative organisation is processed specially to detect the developments at
national and European level, Terhechte, Einführung: Das Verwaltungsrecht der Europäischen
Union als Gegenstand rechtswissenschaftlicher Forschung - Entwicklungslinien, Prinzipien und
Perspektiven, in Terhechte (Ed.), Verwaltungsrecht der Europäischen Union, (Nomos, 2010), § 1
para. 62.
A. Wellerdt, Organisation of Banking Regulation, SpringerBriefs in Law,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-17638-3_1
1.1 Subject of the Study
Regulation includes any sovereign interference of administration in an economic
sector. Regulation is especially important in the ﬁnancial markets. Only in October
2008 the business behaviour of ﬁnancial institutions lead to a global collapse of the
market. The causes and consequences are diverse and still present.
So far, the regulation of the ﬁnancial markets followed a strategy of self-regulation.
States agreed on non-binding standards and thus provided a framework which was
put into practice by the ﬁnancial sector with less government control and without
government valuation. As a result, ﬁnancial institutions set a focus on returns and
neglected risks. This particular business behaviour of ﬁnancial institutions was
endeavoured by an expansionary monetary policy of the U.S. Federal Reserve.
Cheap money at low interest rates was supposed to boost bank lending to private
clients. Through a lack of market discipline, while granting credits against securities
(mortgage), a bubble in the housing market emerged. The creditworthiness or
liquidity of clients and the value of real estate as collateral were overestimated.2
Long-dated loans were bundled by banks and then resold (to regional banks, life
insurance companies, pension funds and investment banks).3 So-called AssetBacked-Securities were structured with graded default risks and varying interest
rates were rated positive (AAA-Rating) by rating agencies. Default or liability risks
could not be measured reliably,4 and loan securitisations were laid with less equity
than securities in the balance sheets.5 This business behaviour was particularly
favoured by commercial and investment banks. They provided false incentives to
run risky ﬁnancial activities and also paid large bonuses to employees.6
Increasing defaults in payment by borrowers led to price reductions of credit
securitisation. Rating agencies downgraded the ratings and revealed an inadequate
availability of capital and liquidity constraints in the ﬁnancial institutions. The
collapse of single ﬁnancial institutions led, on the one hand, to a huge loss of
Hellwig, Gutachten zum 68. Deutschen Juristentag, (C.H. Beck, 2010), E12 et seq.; 20 et seq.
Hellwig, Gutachten zum 68. Deutschen Juristentag, (C.H. Beck, 2010), E12 et seq.; 16 et seq.
Hellwig, Gutachten zum 68. Deutschen Juristentag, (C.H. Beck, 2010), E22 et seq.
Hellwig, Gutachten zum 68. Deutschen Juristentag, (C.H. Beck, 2010), E31 et seq.
R. Fischer in Boos/Fischer/Schulte-Mattler (Eds.), KWG, 4th ed. (C.H. Beck, 2012), Einf KWG
(German Banking Act) para.103.
conﬁdence in the soundness of the banking system and, on the other hand, to a
liquidity crisis.7 Large or specialised credit institutions were about to become
insolvent. However, these institutions were deemed to be too big to fail.8
Governmental assistance was required to preserve the functioning of the economy.9 This idea enjoyed politically a broad consensus but was economically not
without controversy. In a market economy, governmental interventions are an
exception. If government agencies provide ﬁnancial assistance to rescue banks,
these banks are no longer forced to leave the market, even if they operated poorly.
Governmental assistance favours single institutions rather than bringing economic
resources to their best use by free market forces. Thus, the competition is distorted
and damaged. Supply and demand are no longer allocated efﬁciently. Market
failures occur which were accompanied by insufﬁcient supervision and a lack of
regulations to execute bank resolutions and insolvencies. These deﬁcits in regulation and supervision had a systemic effect and lead to government failure.10 The
self-regulation of ﬁnancial markets failed. Financial institutions are operating across
borders at the European internal market. Nevertheless, the supervision of business
behaviour takes place at a national level and is subject of widely varying regulations
between the Member States.11 The banking crisis has shown that ﬁnancial institutions engaged in risky speculation while trusting that the government and
therefore the taxpayers will give, if necessary, a helping hand. Incentives like taking
a higher risk than economically efﬁcient (moral hazard)12 have a macroeconomic
impact and burden the acceptance of the market economy system. In response to the
shortcomings and failures of the ﬁnancial sector a more consistent and comprehensive state regulation developed. Based on the structural causes of the crisis, the
Banking Regulation Law tightened the substantive rules at a supranational level.
First, the capital adequacy requirements were increased to underpin high-risk
positions, also liquidity principles were speciﬁed and their implementation monitored by stress tests.13 In this way, the risks of a bank solvency are reduced, a new
In particular after the collapse of both the IKB in July 2007 in Germany and the investment bank
Lehman Brothers Banking Corporation in the United States in September of 2008.
The term too big to fail describes companies whose insolvency would cost the national economy
more than its rescue. According to the Financial Stability Board, 28 banks and nine insurance
companies are currently considered to be so large that their collapse would threaten the ﬁnancial
system, Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht, Systemrelevante Finanzunternehmen,
BaFin-Journal 10/2013, 30 (31).
In Germany there is to name in particular the “rescue” of the Hypo Real Estate with guarantees
from the government in the amount of 100 billion euros and the participation of the Federal
Government as a shareholder of the Commerzbank.
Kindler, Finanzkrise und Finanzmarktregulierung, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift (2010), 2465.
Ferber, Die Neuordnung der europäischen Aufsichtsstruktur, Ifo-Schnelldienst 64 (2011), 9 (10).
In particular explored in the securities market: Mankiw and Taylor (Eds.), Economics, 2nd ed.
(South Western Cengage Learning, 2011), 823; Bormann and Finsinger (Eds.), Markt und Regulierung, (Vahlen, 1999), 512 et seq.
An overview is provided by Zeitler, Finanzmarktkrise und Bankenaufsicht, in Grieser and
Heemann (Eds.), Bankenaufsichtsrecht, (Frankfurt School Verlag, 2010), 5.
conﬁdence between banks can be created and the interbank market is stimulated.
Moreover, the formally established independent supervisory structure provides
sanctions, and combines the supervision at both macroeconomic and microeconomic level.14 Especially here, the administrative organisation grows in importance.
1.1.2 Framing of the Problem
The administrative organisation creates the structural requirements for the administration.15 Particularly, the design of organisational units enables a context control.
The control of administrative actions by organisations happens within a standardised framework. These frameworks affect the decision-making processes of
administrative units, which affect in return the ability to make certain types of
administrative actions or decisions.16 Administrative organisation is attached to a
growing importance not only formally, but also materially. The Administrative
Organisation Law creates structures in which regulatory decisions are controlled.
The organisational law of the administration of regulation is not recognised
appropriately in jurisprudential discussion. It rather runs out in the mere descriptions that only superﬁcially describe its appearance in practice. Due to the
Administrative Organisation Law, jurisprudential knowledge of state regulation and
the economic approaches of the New Institutional Economics can be related
methodologically.17 Thus, the influence of organisations on decisions of the
banking regulation is examined with the aid of approaches from the Institutional
Economics. Organisations are all national public regulators, European associations
of public regulators and plural regulation actors. They pursue the regulation of
markets to secure the common good. The organisation of the actors is done by the
appropriate conﬁguration of institutions.18 Institutions are formal and informal rules
(norms); combined they form a system through which the behaviour of organisations can be controlled.19 The economic concept of institutions means the legal
In detail Höfling, Gutachten zum 68. Deutschen Juristentag, (C.H. Beck, 2010), F43 et seq.
Schmidt-Aßmann, Einführung, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997), 9 (20).
Schuppert, Verwaltungswissenschaft, (Nomos, 2000), 547; Weaver and Rockman, Assessing the
effects of institutions, When and how do institutions matter, in Weaver and Rockman (Eds.), Do
Institutions matter? Government Capabilities in the United States and Abroad, (Brookings Institute, 1993), 1 (9).
Möllers, Der vermisste Leviathan, (Suhrkamp, 2008), 83; Ruffert, Begriff, in Fehling and Ruffert
(Eds.), Regulierungsrecht, (Mohr Siebeck, 2010), § 7 paras. 18, 22.
Erlei, Leschke and Sauerland, Neue Institutionenökonomik, 2nd ed. (Schäffer-Poeschel, 2007),
22, 65; Richter and Furobotn, Neue Institutionenökonomik, 4th ed. (Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 7 et seq.
North, Institutions, institutional change and economic performance, (Cambridge University
Press, 1991), 3 et seq.; Leschke, Regulierungstheorie aus ökonomischer Sicht, in Fehling and
Ruffert (Eds.), Regulierungsrecht, (Mohr Siebeck, 2010), § 6 para. 13.
bases (including laws, regulations, contracts, rules of procedures) of players in the
banking regulation. They determine who is responsible for decisions in a particular
area and which procedures need to be followed.20 Douglass C. North establishes a
link between organisation and institution, after which the development of the
organisation depends on institutional frameworks, while organisations themselves
affect the development of the institutional framework.21
The regulation of ﬁnancial institutions is based on uncertainties, since the
business of the ﬁnancial sector has to deal with risks which may affect private
investors and the economy as a whole. Aim of the banking regulation is both, to
reduce information asymmetries between banks as providers and private clients as
buyers, and to generate conﬁdence in the ﬁnancial market. Particularly, economic
uncertainties are difﬁcult to regulate. Which institutions are considered systemically
relevant? How much capital is needed to cover the risk? What minimum liquidity is
required to ensure the solvency of credit institutions? The administration of regulation requires comprehensive information to reduce factual uncertainties22 in the
banking regulation. This dilemma is less resolved through a substantive and procedural programme control as through the institutional arrangements of the organisations that programme methods and control decisions.
1.1.3 Overview of the Legal Basis of Banking Regulation
Terminologically this study deals with the administrative organisation of banking
regulation. The focus is set on all administrative actors who are entrusted with the
supervision, recovery and management of ﬁnancial institutions. The rules made for
the supervision and the rules made for the recovery and resolution of ﬁnancial
institutions deserve special attention. Fundamental impulses emerged at an international level. These impulses embraced directives and regulations at a European
level before they were transposed in national law or were applied directly.
With the Declaration on Strengthening the Financial System23 of the Heads of
State and Government (Group of Twenty in April 2009), the Financial Stability
Board was established. The board was, among other things, given the tasks to
evaluate the stability of the global ﬁnancial system, to identify systemically
important and cross-border ﬁnancial institutions, and to promote the cooperation
Arrow, Essays in the theory of risk-bearing, (North-Holland Publications, 1971), 224 et seq.
Press, 1991), 5, 8.
Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Proﬁt, (Harper & Row, 1971), 259 et seq.; for more details about
generating knowledge as problem of regulation see Herzmann, Konsultationen, (Mohr Siebeck,
2010), 33 et seq.
G20 Declaration on Strengthening the Financial System, London Summit, 2 April 2009 (available
online, last downloaded 28.02.2015 at http://www.g20ys.org/upload/ﬁles/London_2.pdf).
and exchange of information between the Financial Supervisory Authorities to
implement regulatory and supervisory measures.
These regulations were supplemented by the Basel Committee on Banking
Supervision with the framework “Basel III: A global regulatory framework for
more resilient banks and banking systems”24 to strengthen the quality and quantity
of equity, broader securitisation of risks with equity, international liquidity and risk
management standards and to supervise systemically relevant banks.25 Geographical disadvantages of ﬁnancial centres can be avoided by worldwide standard rules.
The ﬁnancial crisis has revealed discrepancies between different national regulatory
rules and surveillance actors in Europe.26 Fragmented supervisory rules and competences could not be properly coordinated during the crisis.27 There is a tension
between government requirements for the provision of equity capital and a fair,
private competition in the European internal market.28 Goals of a fundamental
reform of the ﬁnancial regulation were detailed substantive and procedural programmes and extensive regulation actors to submit the ﬁnancial industry to stricter
regulation. At the same time, the legislative techniques of the European Union
changed its course. Substantive and procedural requirements of the banking regulation were regulated according to Art 288 (3) Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union (TFEU)29 by means of directives that were only binding as to the
result to be achieved. Member States were left with the choice of form and method.
So the national legislators remained with a little scope for implementation. Under
the impact of the ﬁnancial crisis, a group of experts, under the direction of former
International Monetary Fund (IMF) president Jacques de Larosière, came to the
conclusion that the national scope of implementation led to an inconsistent European regulatory framework.30 Instead, regulation was recommended as instrument
to avoid such scopes in the future.31 The interaction of directive and regulation was
supposed to create a high level of harmonisation in the banking regulation.
Therewith, regulatory forbearance through the Member States and regulatory
Bank for International Settlements, A global regulatory framework for more resilient banks and
banking systems 2010; revised version published in June 2011 (available online, last downloaded
28.02.2015 at: http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs189.pdf).
For further details see Bundesbankpublikation: Basel III – Leitfaden zu den neuen Eigenkapital
und Liquiditätsregeln für Banken, (Deutsche Bundesbank, 2011).
Wymeersch, The new European ﬁnancial regulatory bodies, revue bancaire et ﬁnancière (2012),
Schäfer/Rolker, Bankenaufsicht im Spannungsfeld von Regulierung und Wettbewerb, in Grieser
and Heemann (Eds.), Bankenaufsicht nach der Finanzmarktkrise, (Frankfurt School Verlag, 2011),
Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, OJ C 326,
26.10.2012, p. 47.
De Larosière Report, 25 February 2009, paras.99, 102 (available online, last downloaded
28.02.2015 at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/ﬁnances/docs/de_larosiere_report_en.pdf).
De Larosière Report, 25 February 2009, para.110 (available online, last downloaded 28.02.2015
at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/ﬁnances/docs/de_larosiere_report_en.pdf).
capture between national supervisory boards and ﬁnancial institutions were supposed to be avoided.32 As result the substantive provisions of the Basel III
framework were implemented through the Capital Requirements Directive IV33 and
the Capital Requirements Regulation34 in the European Union.35 In addition, the
European Commission adopted regulatory technical and implementing standards,
developed by the European Banking Authority. Under the heading “Single Rule
Book” supervisory rules were ought to extend themselves not only to large credit
institutes (as planned in Basel III), but also to all credit institutes and investment
Furthermore, the Financial Stability Board designed “Key Attributes of Effective
Resolution Regime for Financial Institutions”36 at an international level. This
impetus was implemented at a European level by the Directive establishing a
framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment
ﬁrms,37 which creates a material framework that harmonises the recovery and
resolution instruments. In addition, the Regulation establishing uniform rules and a
uniform procedure38 complements the already advanced stage of the development
of a uniform European monitoring mechanism.39 The goal is to provide tools,
which enable a bank resolution without using the taxpayers’ money.
The Federal Republic of Germany implemented the market-related Regulation in
accordance with the German Securities Trading Act40 and the institutional
Kämmerer, Bahn frei der Bankenunion, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht (2013), 830
Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access
to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and
investment ﬁrms, OJ L 176, 27.06.2013, p.338.
on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment ﬁrms, OJ L 321, 30.11.2013, p.6.
For further details see Höpfner, CRD IV Regulierungspaket für Banken, BaFin Journal 1/2014,
21 et seq.
Financial Stability Board, Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions, 2011, updated version published October 2014 (available online, last downloaded
28.02.2015 at: http://www.ﬁnancialstabilityboard.org/wp-content/uploads/r_141015.pdf).
Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment ﬁrms, OJ
L 173, 12.06.2014, p.190.
establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and
certain investment ﬁrms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund, OJ L 225, 30.07.2014, p.1.
In detail Zimmer, Gutachten zum 68. Deutschen Juristentag, (C.H. Beck, 2010), G 49 et seq.
Gesetz über den Wertpapierhandel (Wertpapierhandelsgesetz – WpHG) as published in the
announcement of 09 April 1998 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 2708), last amended on 15 July 2014
(Federal Law Gazette I, p. 934).
supervision in accordance with the German Banking Act.41 This is, in terms of
recovery and resolution, by the Restructuring Act42 and—recently announced—the
Recovery and Resolution Act 43 coming into force as of 01.01.2015. Formally, the
ongoing supervision is performed by the Deutsche Bundesbank, while the German
Federal Financial Supervisory Authority shall make supervisory decisions and the
Agency for Financial Stability carries out the recovery and regulation of credit
1.1.4 State of Previous Investigations
A study on the legal assessment of the impact of organisations on decision-making
in bank Regulation Law does not exist. The Administrative Organisation Law and
approaches of the New Institutional Economics are ought to serve as model for this
The research on the influence of organisations on decision-making focuses on
socio-economic studies on the use of uncertainties while making decisions. The
political scientists Dorothea Jansen and Klaus Schubert raise the question “how
interactions and constellations of actors influence the result.” In terms of New
Institutional Economics authors to mention are Douglass C. North and Kenneth
J. Arrow. Arrow examines an “interest in studying how organisations solve their
problems”. North emphasises that “organisations […] will reflect the opportunities
provided by the institutional matrix” as a “fundamental long-run source of change”.
The legal research does not go beyond ﬁrst attempts. 44 Only William E. Kovacic
uses the example of a competition law from an Anglo-American perspective and
establishes that “institutional considerations are beginning to receive the attention
they deserve”.45 A coherent doctrine has not yet developed.
Particularly, the ﬁeld of Regulation Law, in which organisations clearly deﬁne
and carry out the substantive law requirements, the relationship between organisation and decision-making in the German and European law is only discussed
Gesetz über das Kreditwesen (Kreditwesengesetz – KWG) as published in the announcement of
09. September 1998 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 2776) last amended on 15 July 2014 (Federal Law
Gazette I, p. 934).
Gesetz zur Reorganisation von Kreditinstituten (Kreditinstitute-Reorganisationsgesetz – KredReorgG) as published in the announcement of 09. December 2010 (Federal Law Gazette I,
p. 1900) last amended on 22 December 2011 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 3044).
Gesetz zur Sanierung und Abwicklung von Instituten und Finanzgruppen (Sanierungs- und
Abwicklungsgesetz – SAG) as published in the announcement of 10 Dezember 2014 (Federal Law
Gazette I, p. 2091).
Posner, Economic Analysis of Law, 8th ed. (Wolters Kluwer International, 2011), 31, 33.
Kovacic, Distinguished essay: Good agency practice and the implementation of competition law,
in Hermann, Krajewski and Terhechte (Eds.), European Yearbook of International Economic Law,
Vol. 4 (2013), 3 (6).
basically. Trends in legal literature tend to describe the organisational forms of
banking regulation without discussing their influence on regulatory decisions.
Based on these descriptions, the given problem can be viewed systematically.
Given the high practical relevance of the legal assessment of the relationship
between organisational forms and decisions in the banking regulation, it appears to
be essential to systematically classify and link the multitude of regulatory actors.
1.2 Aim of the Investigation
This study aims to determine the organisation of the administration of regulation in
the European Composite Administration at a national, European and international
level. Therefore, organisational models are created. In addition, a focus is set on
two frameworks: on the one hand, on the legal basis for the organisation of banking
regulation and, on the other hand, on the dilemma between monetary policy and
banking regulation with regard to regulatory decisions.
Centre of investigation is the question how organisational forms influence
decision-making in the banking regulation. Associated with this is the question how
the administration of regulation can close the gap between the given and needed
information. Given information are already owned or can be gained by the
administration of regulation. Information not given but needed is important to know
to adequately regulate the markets. This work starts on the administrative organisation of the administration of regulation in the reference area of banking regulation. There are different institutional requirements for equipping organisations.
These organisations can generate knowledge and participate in the regulatory
decision-making process. Thus, each organisation form has a different influence on
decision-making in the European regulatory network. This allows the organisation
of banking regulation to serve as a basis for discussions in the regulatory practice.
The aim of the investigation is to come up with theses for the organisation of the
administration of regulation to meet the dynamic conditions of the ﬁnancial sector
by organised regulatory actors. The resulting theses can be viewed from two different angles. From one perspective, the effect of different institutional arrangements for the organisational design can be derived. From the other perspective,
constructive approaches can be gained by creating models to develop or reform the
administration of regulation in other economic sectors.
The investigation will in particular show that the density of regulation within the
institutional framework affects the organisational power of the regulatory actors,
and that the organisational power is correlated with the influence of regulatory
actors on the decision-making process.
The investigation of the relationship of organisation and decision on the example of
banking regulation calls for a terminological introduction. Approaching the concepts of administration and organisation enables to work out key elements of the
administrative organisation design, which are used in the following to create
administrative organisations in the banking regulation. Subsequently, the concept of
regulation is deﬁned in the broader sense of the word as used in ﬁnancial markets
and ﬁnancial institutions. Thus, the functions of banking regulation can be understood. Against the background of this abstract introduction, the unique challenges
of banking regulation are outlined. These challenges comprise asymmetric information, actual uncertainties and incomplete knowledge.
Five model types of administrative organisations are set up, based on administrative organisation elements. Particular importance is placed on the institutional
arrangements of the organisation, as they deﬁne the principles, competencies and
relationships between the respective actors. Then, the manifestations of the
administration of regulation are classiﬁed with a total of eleven actors in an
organisational and process sequence of banking regulation. Following this, the
organisation models and their respective manifestations in banking regulation are
placed in a matrix of institutional organisational power and their respective influence on regulatory decision.
Seven theses on the organisation of banking regulation derive from the systematic analysis of banking regulation actors: the organisation of banking regulation
follows no legal foundation in the European Treaties (I), the banking supervision by
the European Central Bank (ECB) is incompatible with their contractual mandate
for monetary policy (II), the European bank resolution leads to a communitarisation
of liability (III), the European banking regulation is incompatible with the determination of the German Basic Law for democratic legitimacy (IV), banking
supervision collides with the model of the Union law enforcement (V), the density
of regulation of the institutional framework affects the organisational power of the
regulatory actors (VI), the organisational power correlates with the influence of
regulatory actors on decisions (VII).
Finally, a summary on the organisation of banking regulation is given.
Administrative Organisation of Banking
2.1 The Concept of Administrative Organisation
Administrative Organisation and Administrative Organisation Law are mostly
described at an abstract level in administrative science.1 This is because the dogmatic foundations, developed in earlier times, of the German Federal and Union
Administration have not been adjusted in accordance with the ongoing developments and various phenomena of administrative reality. As a result, the administrative organisation is exhausted in a variety of exceptions in regard to a lack of
consistent systematic rules.
An approach to the concept of administrative organisation should take place by
means of a not only semantic separation of the concepts of administration and
organisation in order to identify the elements of administrative organisation and
their interplay (Sect. 2.1). Based on this, the functions of administrative organisation used for controlling administrative action can be understood (Sect. 2.2).
Although the forms of administrative organisation differ at a national and European
level, as well as in different areas of administration between state and society,
administrative organisations have common elements (Sect. 2.3). They form the
conceptual basis for the following analysis of banking regulation.
2.1.1 Organising Administration
A ﬁrst approach to the concept of “administration” can be derived from the meaning
of the word itself. “Administer” means as much as “to affect something”,
The conception of this chapter and the main reasoning is based on broader explanations in
Chapter 2 in Wellerdt, Organisation der Regulierungsverwaltung, forthcoming.
Schmidt-Aßmann, Das allgemeine Verwaltungsrecht als Ordnungsidee, 2nd ed. (Springer, 2004),
Ch. 5. para. 2; Groß, Das Kollegialprinzip in der Verwaltungsorganisation, (Mohr Siebeck, 1999),
8 et seq.
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-17638-3_2
2 Administrative Organisation of Banking Regulation
“to manage something”, and “to direct the taking of something”.2 In addition,
a holistic deﬁnition of the term “administration” has not been accepted until today.3
The reason lies in the nature of administration, as it is possible to describe but not
deﬁne administration.4 Administration needs to be open for further developments to
deal with new manifestations in economics and society. This means: administration
is the sum of all state bodies involved in the performance of public services.5
In addition, administration has not only a substantive executive, but also a
formally organising function.6 The concept of administration is understood and
used ambiguously. Administration describes diverse, purposive performances of
duties for the common good by trustees appointed for this purpose. Further,
administration describes the entirety of bodies of the nation-state and supranational
organisations, which administer social and economic areas. Administration is a
system supporting the decision-making process.
It processes stimuli from the environment, in order to carry out administrative
tasks and to fulﬁl administrative purposes.7 Hence, administration describes, on the
one hand, a dynamic, multi-functional activity of administering different areas of
life and economy. On the other hand, it is understood as a synonym for the static
organisation of performing state activities.8 With that, administration is an organisational unit which organises state action.
Duden Band 10 – Das Bedeutungswörterbuch, 4th ed. (Bibliographisches Institut, 2010), 1045,
1045; Stober, in Wolff, Bachof, Stober and Kluth (Eds.), Verwaltungsrecht I, 12th ed. (C.H. Beck,
2007), § 3 para. 8 et seq.; Ellwein, Einführung in die Regierungs- und Verwaltungslehre,
(Kohlhammer, 1966), 108 et seq.
Forsthoff, Lehrbuch des Verwaltungsrechts, Erster Band: Allgemeiner Teil, 10th ed. (C.H. Beck,
1973), § 1 I: “Von jeher ist die Verwaltungsrechtswissenschaft um eine Deﬁnition ihres Gegenstandes, der Verwaltung, verlegen”; this view is supported by Stober, in Wolff, Bachof, Stober and
Kluth (Eds.), Verwaltungsrecht I, 12th ed. (C.H. Beck 2007), § 3 para. 3; Möllers, Gewaltengliederung, (Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 112 et seq.
1973), § 1 I.
Püttner, Verwaltungslehre, 4th ed. (C.H. Beck, 2007), § 4 I para. 10; Moreover, the positive
concepts take up different, typical features of the administration, instead of many Ehlers, Staatliche
Verwaltung, in Erichsen and Ehlers (Eds.), Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht, 14th ed. (De Gruyter,
2010), § 1 para. 6 with other references in footnotes 8-21.
Thieme, Verwaltungslehre, (Carl Heymanns, 1984), § 1 paras. 5 et seq.; Groß, Die Verwaltungsorganisation als Teil organisierter Staatlichkeit, in Hoffmann-Riem, Schmidt-Aßmann and
Voßkuhle (Eds.), Grundlagen des Verwaltungsrechts – Vol.1, 2nd ed. (C.H. Beck, 2012), § 13
para. 7, Bull and Mehde (Eds.), Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht, 8th ed. (C.F. Müller, 2009), § 10
para. 371; Möllers, Gewaltengliederung, (Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 114, 117.
Krebs, Die Juristische Methode im Verwaltungsrecht, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem
(Eds.), Methoden der Verwaltungsrechtswissenschaft, (Nomos, 2004), 209; for basic understanding Trute, Methodik der Herstellung und Darstellung verwaltungsrechtlicher Entscheidungen,
in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Methoden der Verwaltungsrechtswissenschaft,
(Nomos, 2004), 293 (306 et seq.).
Krebs, Verwaltungsorganisation, in Isensee and Kirchhof (Eds.), Handbuch des Staatsrechts –
Vol. V, 3rd ed. (C.F. Müller, 2007), § 108 para. 1; Thieme, Verwaltungslehre, (Carl Heymanns,
1984), § 1 para. 9; Schuppert, Verwaltungswissenschaft, (Nomos, 2000), 79 et seq.
2.1.2 Administering Organisation
A deﬁnition of the concept “Organisation” has already taken place in economics,9
social sciences10 and jurisprudence.11 Thus, the concept of organisation is ambiguous
because of its different meanings. Its meanings range from the organising process
over the internal order of an administrative unit up to the social structure as such.12
Organisations are complex social structures that work under the principle of jobsharing. From the outside they appear as an integrated whole.13 They rather combine interrelated actions and communications within or between administrative
units.14 Organisations administer actions and communications by performing duties
in a strict hierarchical or collegial15 order. These duties are assigned to specialised
organisation members with the help of a detailed programming.16
Like the concept of administration, the concept of organisation is understood
equivocal.17 An organisation describes not only institutionally a static unit of bodies.
Kosiol, Organisation der Unternehmung, 2nd ed. (Gabler, 1976),15 et seq.; 186 et seq.; Wöhe and
Döring, Einführung in die allgemeine Betriebswirtschaftslehre, 25th ed. (Vahlen, 2013), 100 et seq.
Luhmann, Funktionen und Folgen formaler Organisation, 2nd ed. (Duncker & Humblot, 1972),
29, 31 et seq.; Mayntz, Soziologie der öffentlichen Verwaltung, (C.F.Müller, 1978), 82 et seq.
Kluth, in Wolff, Bachof, Stober and Kluth (Eds.), Verwaltungsrecht II, 7th ed. (C.H. Beck,
2010), § 79 I paras. 3 et seq.; Burgi, Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht, in Erichsen and Ehlers (Eds.),
Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht, 14th ed. (De Gruyter, 2010), § 7 paras. 4 et seq., for further details
see Schuppert, Verwaltungswissenschaft – Verwaltung, Verwaltungsrecht, Verwaltungslehre,
(Nomos, 2000).
Cf. Krebs, Verwaltungsorganisation, in Isensee and Kirchhof (Eds.), Handbuch des Staatsrechts –
Vol. V, 3rd ed. (C.F. Müller, 2007), § 108 para. 2; Mayntz, Soziologie der Organisation, (Rowohlt,
1963), 36 et seq.; Kosiol, Organisation der Unternehmung, 2nd ed. (Gabler, 1976), 15 et seq.; 19 et
Schmidt-Aßmann, Einführung, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997), 11 (34); Kluth, in Wolff, Bachof,
Stober and Kluth (Eds.), Verwaltungsrecht II, 7th ed. (C.H. Beck, 2010), § 79 I paras. 13 et seq.;
Schuppert, Verwaltungswissenschaft, (Nomos, 2000), 767 et seq.; Luhmann, Funktionen und
Folgen formaler Organisation, 2nd ed. (Duncker & Humblot, 1972), 23 et seq.
Schmidt-Aßmann, Einführung, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997), 11 (34); Trute, Die Funktionen von
Organisationen und ihre Abbildung im Recht, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.),
Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997), 249 (254, 263 et seq.);
Brohm, Strukturen der Wirtschaftsverwaltung, (Kohlhammer, 1969), 16 et seq.
Groß, Das Kollegialprinzip in der Verwaltungsorganisation, (Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 111 et seq.
Groß, Grundzüge der organisationswissenschaftlichen Diskussion, in Schmidt-Aßmann and
Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997),
139 (141).
Schmidt-Aßmann, Einführung, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997), 11 (35); Groß, Die Verwaltungsorganisation als Teil organisierter Staatlichkeit, in Hoffmann-Riem, Schmidt-Aßmann and Voßkuhle
(Eds.), Grundlagen des Verwaltungsrechts – Vol.1, 2nd ed. (C.H. Beck, 2012) § 13 para. 4.
An organisation was created as a dynamic organising instrument for the fulﬁlment of
tasks. It takes action to guide administrative actions in a certain direction.18 Thus,
the organisation creates an institutional framework for the decision-making process
and it further enriches it with administration decisions.19 In other words, organisation is the appearance and realisation of administration.20
2.1.3 Meaning of Administrative Organisation
The rules of the administrative organisation of national and European administrative bodies arise especially through laws, regulations or statutes and through
frameworks of the German Basic Law21 or the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union with its principles of democracy and rule of law.
Administrative organisation is the best possible fulﬁlment of public services.22
They possess and link elementary functions.23 First, administrative organisations
can reduce possible decision uncertainties by collecting and comparing the organisation’s own knowledge. Furthermore, they can flexibly combine resources of all
organisation members, generate information, learn from practical experiences and
gain new knowledge.24
The administrative organisation constitutes the ‘structural requirements of
administering’25 in two respects: ﬁrst, the structure of the administrative organisation determines the administrative action and second, structured administrative
Groß, Das Kollegialprinzip in der Verwaltungsorganisation, (Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 11, 19; for
more details see Ellwein, Regieren und Verwalten (Westdeutscher Verlag, 1976), 148.
Groß, Das Kollegialprinzip in der Verwaltungsorganisation, (Mohr Siebeck, 1999) 19 et seq.;
Kluth, in Wolff, Bachof, Stober and Kluth (Eds.), 7th ed. (C.H. Beck, 2010), § 79 II paras. 1, 93.
Vol. V, 3rd ed. (C.F. Müller, 2007), § 108 para. 1.
Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland in the revised version published in the Federal
Law Gazette Part III, number 100-1, as last amended on 23.12.2014 (Federal Law Gazette I
p. 2438).
Püttner, Verwaltungslehre, 4th ed. (C.H. Beck, 2007), § 7 I para. 1; Loeser, System des Verwaltungsrechts – Vol 2, (Nomos, 1994), § 10 para. 1.
Schmidt-Aßmann, Einführung, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997), 11 (19).
Eifert, Innovation in und durch Netzwerkorganisation: Relevanz, Regulierung und staatliche
Einbindung, in Eifert and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Innovation und rechtliche Regulierung, (Nomos,
2002), 88 (95 et seq.); Schuppert, Verwaltungsorganisation und Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als
Steuerungsfaktoren, in Hoffmann-Riem, Schmidt-Aßmann and Voßkuhle (Eds.), Grundlagen des
Verwaltungsrechts – Vol.1, 2nd ed. (C.H. Beck, 2012) § 16 paras. 139 et seq.
Schuppert, Verwaltungsrechtswissenschaft als Steuerungswissenschaft. Zur Steuerung des
Verwaltungshandelns durch Verwaltungsrecht, in Schmidt-Aßmann, Hoffmann-Riem and
Schuppert (Eds.), Zur Reform des Allgemeinen Verwaltungsrechts, (Nomos, 1993), 67 et seq.;
actions require an adequate administrative organisation. So, administrative organisations give static and structure to administration units and have a dynamic
structuring effect on administrative action. Thus, administrative organisation gains
not only formally, but also materially importance for the control of administrative
decisions. This interdependency enables a special form of control. The concept of
control is terminologically described as a structure management26 or controlling
organisation.27 Behind these conceptualisations stands the realisation that the
Administrative Organisation Law creates structures in which functions, relationships and decisions are organisationally and coherently controlled. In the following
analysis, administrative organisation is seen as a medium that controls the decisionmaking process of the administration through a legal structuring of the organisation.
2.2 Functions of the Administrative Organisation
Administrative organisation has a double function.28 It determines structures and
creates the structures of the administrative organisation.
2.2.1 Constitution and Control
The administrative organisation plays an institutional function by regulating the
internal organisation and external relations of independent administrative units.29
Schuppert, Verwaltungsorganisation und Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsfaktoren,
in Hoffmann-Riem, Schmidt-Aßmann and Voßkuhle (Eds.), Grundlagen des Verwaltungsrechts –
Vol.1, 2nd ed. (C.H. Beck, 2012) § 16 paras.10, 19.
Schmidt-Aßmann, Einführung, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997), 11(14); Schmidt-Aßmann, Das allgemeine Verwaltungsrecht als Ordnungsidee, 2nd ed. (Springer 2004), Ch. 5 paras. 9 et seq.
Schmidt-Aßmann, Das allgemeine Verwaltungsrecht als Ordnungsidee, 2nd ed. (Springer 2004),
Ch. 5 para. 1; Schmidt-Aßmann, Einführung, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.),
Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsressource, (Nomos, 1997), 11 (11, 19 et seq.); Groß,
Das Kollegialprinzip in der Verwaltungsorganisation, (Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 10 et seq.; for different
opinions see Schuppert, Verwaltungsorganisation und Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht als Steuerungsfaktoren, in Hoffmann-Riem, Schmidt-Aßmann and Voßkuhle (Eds.), Grundlagen des Verwaltungsrechts – Vol.1, 2nd ed. (C.H. Beck, 2012), § 16 paras. 2 et seq. Who thinks about three
functions (function of constitution, function of control, democratic function) and Loeser, System des
Verwaltungsrechts – Vol. II, (Nomos, 1994), § 10 paras. 10 et seq. Who thinks about four functions
(function of the rule of law, realisation of fundamental rights through organisation, democratic
function, transmission function through the implementation of fundamental values and structures).
Vol.1, 2nd ed. (C.H. Beck, 2012), § 16 paras. 8; 19; Schmidt-Aßmann, Das allgemeine Verwaltungsrecht als Ordnungsidee, 2nd ed. (Springer, 2004), Ch. 1. para. 36; Groß, Das Kollegialprinzip in der Verwaltungsorganisation, (Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 18 et seq.
On this institutional basis the administrative organisation develops its instrumental
function. It allows the control of administrative decisions by assigning tasks and
decision-making powers. Put simply, the constitution of the administrative organisation creates a framework for controlling administrative actions.
First, the administrative organisation processes dynamically stimuli from its
environment. Then, the control is oriented towards the speciﬁc goals of the static
administrative organisation, resulting from particular tasks that have to be performed.30 Main objective of the administrative organisation is always the realisation
of the substantive law.31
2.2.2 Meaning of the Administrative Organisation Law
The administrative organisation is determined by the Administrative Organisation
Law.32 It gives a normative basis to the administrative organisation. It establishes
the constitution of an organisation and regulates the connection and the functioning
of the bodies in the administrative apparatus. Thus, the regulatory effect of the
Administrative Organisation Law has an “ambiguity” towards the inside and the
outside.33 Special importance is gained by the Administrative Organisation Law by
the involvement of national and unional administrations in the European Composite
Administration.34 This serves the task-related control of the Union’s own administration, the national government administrations and the inter-national state
administrative cooperation.35 In this framework, the Administrative Organisation
Law structures the systemic forces and balances the interactions between actors.
With that, organisations and proceedings become important control resources in an
Trute, Methodik der Herstellung und Darstellung verwaltungsrechtlicher Entscheidungen, in
Schmidt-Aßmann and Hoffmann-Riem (Eds.), Methoden der Verwaltungswissenschaft, (Nomos,
2004), 249 (257 et seq.); Burgi, Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht, in Erichsen and Ehlers (Eds.),
Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht, 14th ed. (De Gruyter, 2010), § 7 para. 14.
Burgi, Verwaltungsorganisationsrecht, in Erichsen and Ehlers (Eds.), Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht, 14th ed. (De Gruyter, 2010), § 7 para. 15; Loeser, System des Verwaltungsrechts –
Vol.II, (Nomos, 1994), § 10 paras. 2 et seq.
Möllers, Materielles Recht – Verfahrensrecht – Organisationsrecht, in Trute, Groß, Röhl and
Möllers (Eds.), Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht – zur Tragfähigkeit eines Konzepts, (Mohr Siebeck,
2008), 489 (500).
Brohm, Strukturen der Wirtschaftsverwaltung, (Kohlhammer, 1969), 18.
Coining of the term, see Schmidt-Aßmann, Einleitung: Der Europäische Verwaltungsverbund
und die Rolle des europäischen Verwaltungsrechts, in Schmidt-Aßmann and Schöndorf-Haubold
(Eds.), Der Europäische Verwaltungsverbund, (Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 1 (7 et seq.).
For elementary information see Schmidt-Aßmann, Die Herausforderung der Verwaltungswissenschaft durch die Internationalisierung der Verwaltungsbeziehungen, Der Staat 45 (2006), 315 et
Tài liệu Department of Pesticide Regulation ppt
(1.45 MB) - Wellerdt organisation of banking regulation (2015)