Legal and Administrative Time Limits in the Context of the Latest Amendments of the Act of 14 June 1960 – Administrative Procedure Code

On 3 July 2019 a rule that a deadline is deemed to have been met if, before its expiry, a letter was posted at a Polish post office facility of the designated operator in the meaning of the Postal Law Act or at a postal facility of the operator providing the universal postal services in another Member State of the European Union, the Swiss Confederation or a Member State of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) – a party to the European Economic Area Agreement, was introduced into the Polish administrative procedure. Prior to the date of the aforementioned amendment coming into force, it was necessary to post a letter at a Polish post office facility of the designated operator in the meaning of the Postal Law Act in order to be able to state that the deadline was met. The interim provisions introducing the above-mentioned changes stipulated that the regulation in the wording before the amendment applies to the factual circumstances that took place before the date of its coming into force. However, by virtue of the judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal of 30 October 2019 also the above-mentioned regulation expired to the extent in which it functioned under the interim provisions. The amendment of the administrative proceedings provisions and the aforementioned ruling of the Constitutional Tribunal made it possible to adjust the administrative procedure in this respect to the constitutional requirements as well as the provisions of the law of the European Union, and ensured the consistency of this regulation with analogous regulations in other proceedings in the Polish legal system.

Evidence is one of the most important parts of any administrative procedure. The Czech Administrative Procedure Code contains the basic legal regulation of evidence in administrative proceedings and a demonstrative list of evidence. The administrative authorities are therefore not limited in the proceedings to the explicitly stated means of proof. However, the fundamental problem is that the Administrative Procedure Code regulates the implementation of only those means of proof which it expressly mentions. The Administrative Procedure Code is completely silent in relation to other means of proof and the course of their implementation. Nevertheless, in many cases, administrative authorities also need to take other means of proof (not regulated by the Administrative Procedure Code), in particular proof by means of an audiovisual recording or proving the content of websites. The author will therefore focus on answering the questions that cause the greatest problems in this context in practice: “What rules must be followed in obtaining this evidence in order to be legal evidence? Under what conditions and by what procedure should the administrative authorities take this evidence? To what extent can analogy be followed in the implementation of this evidence? The answers to these questions will be demonstrated mainly in relation to the audiovisual evidence and the evidence of the content of the website. This is because of the evidence that is gaining in frequency and importance with regard to the development of modern society and information technology. Based on the analysis of the current administrative practice and case law, de lege ferenda proposals will also be formulated in relation to the current (non)regulation of this evidence in the Administrative Procedure Code.

The article considers the rights and obligations of experts on economic affairs in the relevant legislation (the Law of Ukraine "On Forensic Expertise"; the Instruction on the Appointment and Conduct of Forensic Examinations and Expert Studies and the Scientific and Methodological Recommendations on the Preparation and Appointment of Forensic Examinations and Expert Studies; the Instruction on the Peculiarities of Forensic Expert Activity by Certified Forensic Experts who do not work in state specialised expert institutions) and procedural legislation (the Criminal Procedure Code, the Civil Procedure Code, the Commercial Procedure Code and the Code of Administrative Procedure). The purpose of the article (to study the rights and obligations of forensic experts on economic affairs in accordance with the requirements of relevant and procedural legislation) is achieved by using the following general scientific and special research methods: abstract-logical, dialectical, generalization, grouping, and graphical. The study revealed that in conducting forensic examinations and expert studies on economic affairs, there are examinations of documents: accounting, taxation and reporting; economic activities of enterprises and organisations; and financial and credit transactions. At the same time, there is an inconsistency in the names of the types of forensic economic examinations in the relevant legislation. It is determined that the relevant legislation on the rights of experts, including those on economic affairs, provides for 6 of them in the Law of Ukraine "On Forensic Expertise", 8 in the relevant Instructions (only five are similar); the procedural codes establish 8 rights in the Criminal Procedure Code and 6 each in the Civil Procedure Code, the Code of Civil Procedure and the Code of Administrative Procedure (five are also similar). All types of relevant and procedural legislation provide two essentially identical duties of forensic experts (to perform the task and provide an expert opinion and answer questions, if necessary). The Code of Civil Procedure, the Code of Economic Procedure and the Code of Administrative Court Procedure declare only 2 duties each, the Law of Ukraine "On Forensic Expertise" - 3, the Code of Criminal Procedure - 5, and the Instructions - 8. At the same time, the relevant legislation and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine add a general obligation to recuse an expert.

This book shall be an introduction into the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) as an international organization and, inter alia, as a platform for its member states' relations with the EU and for jointly negotiated Free Trade Agreements. EFTA - originally set up by the UK - is an example of how countries that do not want to be members of the EU can still have close links with it. EFTA is a loose intragovernmental association of some economically highly specialised, small and wealthy Western European small states which have, until now, decided not to join the European Union (EU). Essentially it is the platform for Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland to coordinate their free trade policies as far as possible. Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway also use EFTA, in particular its Secretariat, to manage their membership of the European Economic Area (EEA) and to adopt relevant legislation into the Agreement. Particularly in the context of Brexit it should also be noted that there are elements of the relations between the four EFTA States and the EU which are not necessarily based on either the EEA Agreement or the EU-Swiss Agreements. Until recently, EFTA was considered an outdated model. However, since Brexit interest in EFTA has increased. Where the subject was covered in the press, but also in relevant statements by politicians, there was hardly any distinction made between 'EFTA' and the 'EEA'. This book is not about Brexit, rather it will correct certain misconceptions about EFTA and provide a clear overview on what EFTA is: a platform for the economic relations between its member states; a platform for its member states' free trade policy and a platform for its member states' relations with the EU. There will be food for thought on the UK's future outside the EU.

Introduction Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and erectile dysfunction (ED) are known complications following radical prostatectomy. Artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement are effective surgical treatment options for patients who have persistently bothersome SUI and ED, respectively. Patients with concurrent severe SUI and ED may require placement of both implants, which can be performed either in a synchronous or staged fashion. Objective This study seeks to assess differences in outcomes based on the timing of dual implant placement. Methods We performed a retrospective review using the Merative™ Marketscan® Commercial Database from 2007 to 2021. Men >20 years of age who underwent IPP and/or AUS placement were identified using administrative procedure codes. The procedure date was used to identify patients who underwent synchronous or staggered placement in patients with dual implants. Administrative diagnosis and procedure codes were used to assess subsequent reoperation for infection or revision. Associated conditions were controlled for, including patient age, smoking status, obesity, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension. Results We identified 17,848 men who underwent IPP placement and 4277 men who underwent AUS placement. A total of 623 men in these cohorts received both implants. Of these patients, 344 had synchronous placement while 279 had staged placement. IPP reoperation occurred in 7% of patients in the synchronous group and 8.2% in the staged group. AUS reoperation occurred in 9.3% of men in the synchronous group and 7.9% in the staged group. Synchronous placement of IPP and AUS was not associated with an increased risk of reoperation for IPP (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.55-1.77, p=0.95) or AUS (HR 1.51, 95% CI 0.87-2.62, p=0.15) when compared to staged placement. Additionally, dual implant status was not associated with a higher risk of reoperation of IPP (HR 1.29, p=0.09) or AUS (HR 1.20, p=0.53) when compared to patients with single implants. Conclusions There was no difference in rates of reoperation when comparing synchronous or staged implant placement in patients who require placement of both IPP and AUS devices. Neither method was associated with increased rates of reoperation compared to single-implant patients. The timing of dual implant placement does not appear to impact the reoperation rate and can be offered based on surgeon and patient preference. Disclosure No

The European Economic Area (EEA) was created by the Agreement on the European Economic Area, signed at Oporto, Portugal, on 2 May 1992 (‘the EEA Agreement’), which entered into force on 1 January 1994. The EEA was originally intended to create an economic association between two economic blocs in Europe: the European Economic Community (now more often known as the European Union or EU) and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). In the event, one of the members of EFTA, the Swiss Confederation, declined to ratify the EEA Agreement. Accordingly, the EEA Agreement came into effect as between the EU, and its Member States, and the remaining member states of EFTA (the Republic of Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway). The EEA therefore comprises all the current Member States of the EU (numbering, at the time of writing, 27) plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. EFTA remains in existence. Those member states of EFTA that are also members of the EEA are often referred to as ‘the EEA EFTA States’ but, in the EEA Agreement itself, and in similar texts, the phrase ‘EFTA States’ is used. In order to avoid confusion, the phrase ‘EEA EFTA States’ will be used in this chapter to describe those EFTA States that are signatories to the EEA agreement. Relevant legislation and statutory standards Article 57 of the EEA Agreement provides that concentrations which create or strengthen a dominant position, as a result of which effective competition would be significantly impeded within the territory covered by the EEA Agreement or a substantial part of it, are incompatible with the Agreement. For the purposes of applying Article 57, use is made of the criteria and concepts to be found in EC Regulation No. 139/2004. That Regulation and the provisions that implement Article 57 of the EEA Agreement also contemplate that, in certain circumstances, a concentration may be referred to a Member State of the EU or an EEA EFTA State to be dealt with under the legislation of that State.

Legal representation is a traditional institute of the procedural law. The question of its legal nature belongs to the discussion. In science of civil procedural law and arbitration thereon, two main lines have stood out: the 'concept of legal relationship' and the 'concept of action'. In this analysis, the author prefers to consider legal representation, including administrative cases, as procedural activity As some positive novels to the RF Administrative Procedure Code (APC) compared to the previous one the author mentions the expanded range of cases where the Court's can recognize the compulsory participation of the representatives of a body, an organization, a person entrusted with part of the State or other public authority in the Court's proceedings, as well as the RF Administrative Procedure Code containing the rules according to which persons, facilitating the implementation of justice in administrative case may not be representatives of the persons involved in this case. However, rule of Art. 55 Part 1 of the APC RF casts serious doubts as it states that the only persons having higher legal education can act as representatives in administrative cases, which considerably limits the possibilities for the protection of the rights of citizens and organizations in this category of cases. At the same time, as Art. 55 Part 1 of the APC RF lacks any saving clause, the code contains a series of rules that make it possible for persons without legal education still conduct administrative cases, which results in numerous conflicts. Moreover, it is overlooked that, in accordance with applicable law on lawyer activity and legal profession, persons without higher legal education, but having a degree in law can works as advocates. The author also criticizes the wording contained in Art. 54 Part 1 of the APC RF stating that 'Personal participation of a citizen in an administrative case does not deprive him of the right to have a legal representative as well', as the citizen is a priori a participant of the proceedings. Such shortcomings in the new code chapter on the legal representation show to be frequent and require to be eliminated in the future.

Sąd Najwyższy uznał, że postępowanie administracyjne o ustanowienie prawa użytkowania wieczystego, przeprowadzone po stwierdzeniu nieważności decyzji odmawiającej ustanowienia własności czasowej nieruchomości objętej dekretem, nie przerywa biegu przedawnienia roszczenia o naprawienie szkody spowodowanej nieustanowieniem tego prawa. Z poczynionej analizy wynika, że stwierdzenie nieważności decyzji dekretowej następuje ex tunc i skutkuje ponownym rozpoznaniem wniosku na podstawie przepisów prawa materialnego. Ponadto poszkodowanemu, który poniósł szkodę na skutek wydania decyzji z naruszeniem art. 156 § 1 kodeksu postępowania administracyjnego , przysługuje odszkodowanie na podstawie art. 160 k.p.a. Postępowania te mają odrębną podstawę prawną, różnią się treścią. Poszkodowany na skutek wydania decyzji z naruszeniem art. 156 § 1 k.p.a. powinien dochodzić roszczenia z art. 160 § 1 k.p.a. po uzyskaniu ostatecznej decyzji stwierdzającej nieważność decyzji wydanej z naruszeniem prawa. W przeciwnym wypadku naraża się na utratę roszczenia na skutek upływu terminu przedawnienia.

The administrative code of the Republic of Moldova was approved by the Parliament on July 19, 2018 (entered into force on April 1, 2019). One year later, on July 3, 2019, by the Government Emergency Ordinance, no. 57/2019, the Administrative Code of Romania was approved, which entered into force on the date of publication in the Official Gazette of Romania. However, the Administrative Codes of Romania and the Republic of Moldova, although with identical titles, have a different content or object of regulation and are different in their structure. The opinions on administrative codification set out in the Romanian and Moldovan literature are examined in this article. In particular, the issue of the content (object of regulation) of the Administrative Code and the Code of Administrative Procedure is investigated. The article also addresses issues such as the issue of Code priority, the issue of distinguishing between substantial administrative law and the law of administrative procedure. In the author’s opinion, in the administrative field, the object and perimeter of a code can be established starting from the determination of the difference between the material / substantial administrative law and the law of the administrative procedure

This paper show why the standardization of administrative procedure is important for the state legal system that, in the last two decades, the administrative procedure codes were adopted in almost all of the European states. Afterwards author analyzed main driving forces for development of administrative procedural law at the level of the European Union and the Council of Europe. The most important legal sources of European administrative procedural law (basic standards, principles, recommendations and guidelines in this area) are concisely presented but it is clearly indicated that there are certain ambiguities, that these sources don't apply equally to all institutions of the Union, and that they still don't make finished, complete and forever given system that can be automatically transferred to jurisprudence of the member states and candidate countries. Moreover, often administrative process laws of the member states contain rules that are not existing in this kind of regulation at European Union level and that is why the process of adopting the first European Union general law on administrative procedure was initiated, which would further improve the standards of European administrative process in general. When it comes to the general administrative procedure of the Republic of Serbia it has been shown that in spite of the strategic orientation towards the reform of the Law on Administrative Procedure expressed in numerous strategies, our executive authorities in this area have not yet moved beyond the development of the third version of the Draft Law on General administrative Procedure which was afterward adopted by the Government as the Bill. In his final remarks the author concludes stating that the largest number of European standards of administrative process are included in the final version of the Draft, but without eliminating the shortcomings of the existing Law, and without normative adjusting to the circumstances in which the Serbian administration operates, and with unnecessary abandonment of some solutions that have proved to be right in the decades-long practice of administrative authorities.

In the article the author discusses the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement in light of theories of constitutional and legal pluralism. The author begins with a presentation of the EEA Agreement and compares it with the European Union (EU) legal order. It is pointed out that one of the differences between the two legal regimes is the fact that the EU law principle of direct effect is not applicable in EEA law. Since there is no provision in the EEA Agreement which hinders the establishment of direct effect in EEA law, the author seeks to find the deeper explanation for the rejection of the principle. This leads into an elaboration of the pragmatic concept of law. An important feature of this concept of law is the dominant role of the will of the legislator. This constitutional set-up is also reflected in the concept of sovereignty, which is one leading rational of the EEA Agreement. Being in the squeeze between the two rationalities of the EEA Agreement: sovereignty and homogeneity, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) Court has been willing to take into consideration contextual particularities. This contextual or legal pluralistic approach is a result of an implicit and explicit judicial dialogue, which secures the legitimacy of the EFTA Court and the EEA Agreement.

The chapter analyses the influence of the Austrian model on administrative procedure in Czechoslovakia. The new republic emerged after the collapse of Austria-Hungary in 1918. Similar developments—enactment of the code of administrative procedure as government regulation in 1928 were more the continuation of practices and theories than inspiration abroad, despite apparent attention to developments in Austria. Interwar Czechoslovakia also established an administrative judiciary, with the Supreme Administrative Court relying on partial personal continuity and retained expertise. The situation changed significantly after the Second World War. The Czechoslovak Communist regime intentionally abandoned legal traditions when enacting new laws, presented as a new Socialist framework. Despite it, tacit return to tried-and-tested models characterised subsequent decades when the regime embraced ‘Socialist legality’—regarding administrative procedures with the 1967 Code of Administrative Procedure, initially adopted as a parliamentary statute. Nevertheless, admitting or highlighting inspiration by a capitalist country would always be inappropriate. Recognition of national and central European traditions was possible after 1989 thanks to liberalisation and democratisation, as with the 2004 recodified Code of Administrative Procedure.

The issue of applicability of general principles included in Articles 6–16 of the Code of Administrative Procedure is a controversial and a disputable one. Applicability of general principles in jurisdictional procedure, in other procedures regulated by the Code of Administrative Procedure and in the procedures regulated by provisions other than those included in the Code of Administrative Procedure, will be analysed. The doctrine presents different opinions concerning the force of applicability of general principles in those procedures. One thing is certain: general principles of the Code of Administrative Procedure are legal norms which have been singled out in jurisdictional administrative procedure where they fully apply. The range of applicability of general principles of the Code of Administrative Procedure is not limited only to jurisdictional administrative procedure; some principles apply fully to summary procedures due to their nature and specificity. Additionally, general principles of the Code of Administrative Procedure should be also applied to procedures not regulated by codes, which are regulated by other acts concerning administrative procedure.

The study purpose is to analyze the principles of administrative procedure and proceedings established in the Administrative Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as to identify recommendations for their improvement in legislation and in law enforcement practice. The concept and principles of administrative procedure and proceedings are analyzed, and deficiencies in the legal regulation of administrative procedure and proceedings principles are revealed. The study proceeds from the assumption that the existing set of principles of administrative procedure in the Republic of Kazakhstan, set out in the new Administrative Procedure and Processual Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, limit the possibilities for protecting the rights of citizens in the administrative and procedural order. Being limited to the existing set, they significantly narrow the possibilities for improving administrative and legal norms in the future. Based on the review of specialized foreign legislative regulation in the field of administrative procedure, the study gives grounds to say that when developing a new act, the Kazakh legislator did not use positive foreign experience. The experience of Kazakhstan can be used in other countries that are faced with the need to reform or develop administrative procedural regulations.

The aim of the article is to examine the institution of “Silent settlement of the matter” regulated in the Code of Administrative Procedure, as well as in the provisions of substantive law. In a number of Polish laws, the inaction of the administration is seen as bound to have certain legal consequences. Such rules cause many doubts both at the theoretical and practical level, and raise questions about the antidote to such unwanted inactivity of administration. The general clause of positive or negative fictitious adjudication in administrative matters is present in many legal systems. However, in the Polish legal system it lacks a legal definition and the silent settlement handling of the case entails problems of its classification as part of the legal forms of administration. The article shows that the mere introduction of procedural regulations will not result in a breakthrough in the institution of silent positive settlement of the matter, if the legislator does not balance the types of cases to which silence can be applied. Undoubtedly, both substantive and procedural law rules for the regulation of silent settlement are necessary and indispensable. As for substantive law, it should be a well thought-out concept in which silence of administrative bodies in handling matters could be applied without affecting the public interest or the interests the applicant, or any other party to the proceedings. On the other hand, procedural regulations are to guarantee the protection of the rights administered against the inactivity or lack of action by administrative bodies, or lengthy and protracting proceedings. Therefore, the legislator should ensure a well-considered qualification of cases to be recognised in a simplified manner, as well as adopt specific provisions that give competence to administrative bodies to settle matters tacitly so that the institution accomplishes the intended objectives of administrative improvement, and at the same time does not violate the procedural rights and guarantees of the parties for whom silence has legal effects.