Source: https://enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/1249
Timestamp: 2019-09-17 15:22:15
Document Index: 15962625

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 20', '§ 36', '§ 58', '§ 80', '§ 48', '§ 49', '§ 48', '§ 49', '§68', '§ 40', 'art. 37']

Administrative court · Certiorari · Delegated legislation · Exhaustion of remedies · Habeas corpus · Legitimate expectation · Mandamus · Natural justice · Patently unreasonable · Polycentricity · Prerogative writ · Privative clause (ouster clause) · Quo warranto · Ultra vires · Writ of prohibition
Australia · Canada · England · Scotland
China · Mongolia · Ukraine
Constitutional law · Judicial review
Civil law countries often have specialized courts, administrative courts, that review these decisions. The plurality of administrative decisions contested in administrative courts are related to taxation.[citation needed]
1 Administrative law in common law countries
1.2.1 Historical development
2 Administrative law in civil law countries
While administrative decision-making bodies are often controlled by larger governmental units, their decisions could be reviewed by a court of general jurisdiction under some principle of judicial review based upon due process (United States) or fundamental justice (Canada). Judicial review of administrative decisions, it must be noted, is different from an administrative appeal. When sitting in review of a decision, the Court will only look at the method in which the decision was arrived at, whereas in an administrative appeal the correctness of the decision itself will be examined, usually by a higher body in the agency.[citation needed] This difference is vital in appreciating administrative law in common law countries.
The scope of judicial review may be limited to certain questions of fairness, or whether the administrative action is ultra vires. In terms of ultra vires actions in the broad sense, a reviewing court may set aside an administrative decision if it is unreasonable (under Canadian law, following the rejection of the "Patently Unreasonable" standard by the Supreme Court in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick), Wednesbury unreasonable (under British law), or arbitrary and capricious (under U.S. Administrative Procedure Act and New York State law). Administrative law, as laid down by the Supreme Court of India, has also recognized two more grounds of judicial review which were recognized but not applied by English Courts viz. legitimate expectation and proportionality.
In the federal government, the executive branch, led by the president, controls the federal executive departments, which are led by secretaries who are members of the United States Cabinet. The many important independent agencies of the United States government created by statutes enacted by Congress exist outside of the federal executive departments but are still part of the executive branch.
The actions of executive agencies and independent agencies are the main focus of American administrative law. In response to the rapid creation of new independent agencies in the early twentieth century (see discussion below), Congress enacted the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in 1946. Many of the independent agencies operate as miniature versions[citation needed] of the tripartite federal government, with the authority to "legislate" (through rulemaking; see Federal Register and Code of Federal Regulations), "adjudicate" (through administrative hearings), and to "execute" administrative goals (through agency enforcement personnel). Because the United States Constitution sets no limits on this tripartite authority of administrative agencies, Congress enacted the APA to establish fair administrative law procedures to comply with the constitutional requirements of due process.
In France, most claims against the national or local governments are handled by administrative courts, which use the Conseil d'État (State Council) as a court of last resort. The main administrative courts are the "Tribunaux Administratifs" and appeal courts are the "Cours Administratives d'Appel".
Administrative law in Germany, called “Verwaltungsrecht”de:Verwaltungsrecht (Deutschland), generally rules the relationship between authorities and the citizens and therefore, it establishes citizens’ rights and obligations against the authorities. It is a part of the public law, which deals with the organization, the tasks and the acting of the public administration. It also contains rules, regulations, orders and decisions created by and related to administrative agencies, such as federal agencies, federal state authorities, urban administrations, but also admission offices and fiscal authorities etc. Administrative law in Germany follows three basic principles.
Principle of proportionality, which says that an act of an authority has to be suitable, necessary and appropriate[1]
The administrative law in Germany can be divided into three main parts, which are constitutional law, general administrative law and special administrative law.
The constitutional law in Germany is ruled in the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany (German Grundgesetz, [GG]) from 23.05.1949. The first nineteen articles of the “Grundgesetz” represent the constitution in narrower sense and determine the fundamental rights of German citizens. Articles 20 to 146 GG regulate the organization of Germany and legitimize and rule its bodies such as German Bundestag, Bundesrat of Germany or the government and the legislation based on the constitution. Article 20 I GG is exceptionally significant for the basic organization of Germany. It determines that Germany is a federal state. That implies the several individual states to be interconnected in such a way, that they still keep their own sovereignty; but the resulting compound also has state-character (Bundesstaat). In contrast to the European Union, which is a community (confederation) of 27 sovereign countries without state-character [at the moment] (Staatenbund). The welfare state principle, which obliged the state to ensure a rightful social system, can be also derived from Art. 20 I GG.[2]
2. General Administrative Law
2.1 Administrative Procedures Law
§§ 36 – 39, §§ 58 – 59 and § 80 VwVfG rule the structure and the necessary elements of the administrative act. § 48 and § 49 VwVfG have a high relevance in practice, as well. In these paragraphs, the prerequisites for redemption of an unlawful administration act (§ 48 VwVfG [2]) and withdrawal of a lawful administration act (§ 49 VwVfG [3]), are listed.[10]
2.2 Other legal sources
Administration procedural law (Verwaltungsgerichtsordnung [VwVGo]), which was enacted in 1960, rules the court procedures at the administrative court. The VwVGo is divided into five parts, which are the constitution of the courts,[11] action, remedies and retrial, costs and enforcement15 and final clauses and temporary arrangements.[12]
In absence of a rule, the VwVGO is supplemented by the code of civil procedure (Zivilprozessordnung [ZPO]) and the judicature act (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz [GVG]).[13] In addition to the regulation of the administrative procedure, the VwVfG also constitutes the legal protection in administrative law beyond the court procedure. §68 VwVGO rules the preliminary proceeding, called “Vorverfahren” or “Widerspruchsverfahren”,[14] which is a stringent prerequisite for the administrative procedure, if an action for rescission or a writ of mandamus against an authority is aimed.[15] The preliminary proceeding gives each citizen, feeling unlawfully mistreated by an authority, the possibility to object and to force a review of an administrative act without going to court. The prerequisites to open the public law remedy are listed in § 40 I VwGO. Therefore, it is necessary to have the existence of a conflict in public law[16] without any constitutional aspects[17] and no assignment to another jurisdiction.[18]
3. Special Administrative Law
In The Netherlands, administrative law provisions are usually contained in separate laws. There is however a single General Administrative Law Act ("Algemene wet bestuursrecht" or Awb) that applies both to the making of administrative decisions and the judicial review of these decisions in courts. On the basis of the Awb, citizens can oppose a decision ('besluit') made by a public body ('bestuursorgaan') within the administration and apply for judicial review in courts if unsuccessful.
In addition to the system described above there is another part of administrative law which is called "administratief beroep" (administrative appeal). This procedure is available only if the law on which the primary decision is based specifically provides for it and involves an appeal to a higher ranking administrative body. If administrative appeal is available, no appeal to the judicial system may be made.
In Sweden, there is a system of administrative courts that considers only administrative law cases, and is completely separate from the system of general courts.[20] This system has three tiers, with 12 county administrative courts (förvaltningsrätt) as the first tier, four administrative courts of appeal (kammarrätt) as the second tier, and the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden (Regeringsrätten) as the third tier.
In Brazil, unlike most Civil-law jurisdictions, there is no specialized court or section to deal with administrative cases. In 1998, a constitutional reform, led by the government of the President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, introduced regulatory agencies as a part of the executive branch. Since 1988, Brazilian administrative law has been strongly influenced by the judicial interpretations of the constitutional principles of public administration (art. 37 of Federal Constitution): legality, impersonality, publicity of administrative acts, morality and efficiency...
Main article: Law of Chile#Administrative law
In 1990, the Administrative Supervision Regulations (行政检查条例) and the Administrative Reconsideration Regulations (行政复议条例) were passed. Both regulations have since been amended and upgraded into laws. The 1993 State Civil Servant Provisional Regulations (国家公务员暂行条例) changed the way government officials were selected and promoted, requiring that they pass exams and yearly appraisals, and introduced a rotation system. In 1994, the State Compensation Law (国家赔偿法) was passed, followed by the Administrative Penalties Law (行政处罚法) in 1996.
As a homogeneous legal substance isolated in a system of jurisprudence, the administrative law of Ukraine is characterized as: 1) a branch of law; 2) a science; 3) a discipline.[21]
^ Oberath, öffentliches Wirtschaftsrecht p. 12-14
^ Oberath, öffentliches Wirtschaftsrecht p. 16
^ Kopp / Rammsauer Verwaltungsgerichtsordnung Kommentar p. 1-94
^ Administrative law of Ukraine nowadays (the beginning of the 21st cent.): monograph. Edited by Valentyn Galunko. – Kherson, 2010.