Principles Of Administrative Law Research Articles

AI and Administrative Law

Algorithmically-driven decision-making tools have long existed in Canadian administrative agencies, but administrative law largely fails to address such technologies. This chapter uses the basic principles enunciated in administrative law doctrines to demonstrate how algorithmically-driven decisions fundamentally challenge administrative law notions of fairness, responsibility, and justice. In doing so, it identifies which common law principles, such as notice requirements or prohibitions on sub-delegation, might best apply to algorithmic tools. Other doctrines, it argues, must adapt to meaningfully address the problems algorithmic technologies raise for procedural fairness, responsible and responsive decision makers, and substantive justice. A central dilemma, and an area for future evolution, is how administrative law ought to conceptualize algorithmic tools: should it approach them as a forceful policy, a uniquely persuasive source of evidence, or as though they are an additional decision maker? This chapter illustrates how different answers to this question may require varied doctrinal shifts. It then pinpoints opportunities for legislators and policymakers to develop new governance frameworks that address the dilemmas of algorithmically-driven decision-making. When crafting statutes, policies, and institutional arrangements, legislators and policymakers must meaningfully address the interests of marginalized communities, as algorithmically-driven tools tend to impact members of these communities most harshly. This proposal marks a new path for this area of law, as administrative law principles typically protect individual rights and interests but are less adept at confronting systemic injustice.

The Principles of Administrative Law as a Prism for Assessing the Content of Normative and Legal Provisions: Opportunities for Identifying the Problems and Solutions

The author of the article assesses the content of administrative normative and legal acts (on the example of legal regulation of restrictions on receiving gifts) through the prism of modern understanding of the principles of administrative law, which made it possible to distinguish a number of problems for determining the content of some of them and to work out the ways to solve them, namely:
 1) Having studied the norms of the laws of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” and “On Charitable Activities and Charitable Organizations” through the prism of the principle of humanism and justice in the relations between the individual and the state, it is proved that the legal possibility in the sphere of legal relations in the sphere cannot be restricted (forbidden) humanism and charity;
 2) an analysis of the law enforcement practice of implementing the prohibition on gift giving has often revealed a flagrant violation of the rule of law; emphasized that ensuring the legal certainty of the described ban can be ensured by revealing its content by the National Anti-Corruption Agency;
 3) installed:
 – uncertainty about the specific characteristics of “allowed gifts”, which requires amendments to the Law of Ukraine “On Corruption Prevention” to exclude them or to provide clear explanations within the framework of the NACC Guidelines;
 – violation of the provisions of the Typical Anti-Corruption Program of a Legal Entity approved by the Decision of NAPC No. 75 dated from March 2, 2017 No. 75 on the principle of hierarchical highness of law, which requires amendments to them in accordance with the provisions of the Art. 23 of the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption", which defines uniform rules for determining the amount of "allowed gift";
 – the content of the concept of "gift" does not correspond to such an important element of the rule of law as "prohibition of discrimination and equality before the law", which requires amendments to the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" in the part of the correction of the concept of "gift" as such is bounded by the restriction of "family-private" relations not related to the performance of functions of the state or local self-government.
 As a result, it was found out that the principles of administrative law in order to improve the regulatory acts of the sphere of administrative and legal regulation are: 1) as a criterion for assessing the content of provisions of regulatory legal acts, resulting in the isolation of their shortcomings; 2) legal bases for elaboration of amendments and additions to administrative normative legal acts.

Tax Abuse According to Whom?

Before 1996, the Internal Revenue Code presumed that tax regulations applied to transactions executed before their enactment, giving the Treasury Department broad authority to regulate retroactively. In 1996, however, Congress reversed this presumption, requiring regulations relating to Code sections enacted after 1996 to operate prospectively. Congress also provided an important exception in section 7805(b)(3), allowing tax regulations to apply retroactively “to prevent abuse.” Congress did not, however, explicitly define abuse; nor did it designate to any specific actor the power to do so. This Article provides a comprehensive look at the level of deference reviewing courts owe a Treasury Regulation’s interpretation of section 7805(b)(3)’s abuse exception. Generally, an agency’s statutory interpretation is entitled to receive either the strong standard of deference articulated in Chevron v. Natural Resource Defense Council, or the lesser degree of deference articulated in Skidmore v. Swift & Co. To date, the courts reviewing retroactive tax regulations enacted to prevent abuse have declined to apply Chevron deference, relying on administrative law principles recently rejected by the Supreme Court in Mayo Foundation v. United States. This Article, therefore, provides a needed guide to future courts by applying the post-Mayo deference framework to Treasury Regulations that interpret section 7805(b)(3). This Article concludes that, under this framework, a Treasury Regulation’s interpretation of section 7805(b)(3)’s abuse exception should receive strong Chevron deference so long as it is promulgated under proper administrative procedures.This analysis provides a significant contribution. Through the issuance of retroactive regulations, Treasury promotes the efficient enforcement of the tax laws and deters egregious abuse. But case law suggests that the courts and Treasury Department have very different interpretations of the Code’s abuse exception. Therefore, the ability of Treasury to respond to and prevent aggressive tax behavior through retroactive tax regulation may turn largely on which actor possesses primary authority to define tax abuse.

Principles of administrative and legal support for the functioning and development of juvenile justice

The juvenile system is a form of ensuring the rights of children. The practical implementation of many of the foundations of the functioning and development of the juvenile justice system is related to public administration, the internal systemic administrative activities of the judiciary, the prosecutor's office, preliminary investigation bodies, the human rights ombudsman, and the introduction and development of non-criminal measures against minor delinquents. At the same time, the principles of public administration and other manifestations of administrative and legal activity in the field of juvenile justice, which provide a significant part of its functioning, remain beyond the due attention of scientists.This article focuses on the principles of the institution of juvenile justice at the level of a separate branch of law (administrative).In the context of the system of principles of juvenile justice (general and special), a definition is presented, as well as the place of the principles of administrative and legal support and their relationship with other groups of principles. General principles lay ideas common to all legal relations, which are then reflected in special principles. The principles of administrative and legal support for the functioning and development of juvenile justice are referred to the group of special (concrete-functional and (or) specific) foundations. These principles inherit the basic features inherent in the principles of administrative law and are determined by the axiology of this branch of law.Summarizing the results of a number of administrative and legal studies, a list of principles of administrative and legal support for the functioning and development of the juvenile justice system is given, which are divided into three groups: 1) organizational and security principles, 2) functional principles; 3) administrative jurisdictional principles.

Limited Authorisations Between EU and Domestic Law: Comparative Remarks from Dutch Law

Where the number of authorizations available for grant is limited in advance to a maximum number, public authorities have to make a choice between qualified applicants through a selection procedure. EU law has played a major role in developing legal rules on the issuing of these limited authorizations, through, amongst other methods, the development of the obligation of transparency. However, the allocation regime under EU law, in particular as it arises from the internal market freedoms, has some inherent restrictions, only applying to economic activities and sometimes requiring cross-border interest in addition. Thus, in order to develop a general legal regime that applies to any process for the issuing of limited authorizations, the development of an allocation regime rooted in domestic law is necessary. This article discusses recent developments in Dutch case law, where a domestic allocation regime has been derived from the (national) principle of equal treatment. It endorses the adoption of this principle as the central basis for an allocation regime, rooted either in domestic or in EU law, since this principle does not only include the key issues inherent to an allocation context, but also allows for the development of allocation rules at the level of both individual decision-making and general rule-making. administrative law, authorisations, allocation of scarce resources, equal treatment, competition, transparency, general principles of administrative law, legal comparison, EU law, internal market.

Проблеми застосування принципів належного урядування в адміністративному праві України

На сучасному етапі розвитку України важливим є врахування базисних ідей та принципів, на яких повинна засновуватися діяльність у сфері права згідно з міжнародними стандартами. Особливо це стосується розвитку та вдосконалення адміністративного права, зокрема сфери публічного адміністрування. У статті досліджуються принципи належного урядування та проблеми їх практичного застосування в адміністративному праві України.
 Метою статті є дослідження принципів належного урядування в історичному контексті, здійснення аналізу основних принципів належного урядування та їх характерних ознак, визначення переваг і недоліків застосування цих принципів в адміністративному праві України.
 Наукова новизна полягає у здійсненні системного аналізу адміністративної правореалізаційної практики застосування основних принципів належного урядування. Наводяться варіанти ефективної реалізації таких принципів у правовій дійсності та способи ліквідації недоліків і заповнення прогалин.
 Висновки. Принципи належного урядування повинні запроваджуватися системно. Це означає, що лише їх спільна дія може призвести до покращення та підвищення рівня діяльності публічної адміністрації. Реалізація принципів належного врядування була б доречною на чотирьох основних рівнях: теоретичному, нормативно-правовому, інформаційному та «правоусвідомчому». По-перше, наукова доктрина є важливою в тому плані, що хоча її складають суб’єктивні думки науковців та правників-практиків, проте це дає змогу найбільш якісно систематизувати знання у сфері публічного адміністрування, зокрема щодо можливих варіантів застосування керівних принципів. По-друге, нормативно-правовий рівень зумовлюється необхідністю законодавчого закріплення принципів належного урядування, що дисциплінуватиме суб’єктів публічної влади від порушень встановленими санкціями. По-третє, існує потреба інформування суб’єктів публічної влади, особливо державних службовців, про впровадження принципів належного урядування, розкриття їхньої сутності, механізму їх застосування у практичній діяльності. По-четверте, важливим фактором, що сприятиме вирішенню проблем у сфері публічного адміністрування, є правосвідомість. Суть полягає в суб’єктивному розумінні таких принципів та відношенні до них кожного з нас, а не лише суб’єктів публічної влади. І дуже важливо, щоб таке розуміння повністю співпадало із початково закладеною метою та цілями принципів належного урядування.

The Question is "Should Insurers Continuously Update Policyholder Records"? Insurance Law Requires the Principles of Administrative Law to Settle Disputes between the Policyholder and the Insurer

It is possible to argue that the Financial Advisory Intermediary Services Ombud (hereafter FAIS Ombud) has jurisdiction to consider insurer's decisions not to update their internal administrative systems. The FAIS Ombud may therefore investigate such matters as a complaint as defined in section 1 of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act 37 of 2002 (hereafter the FAIS Act). On the other hand, upon any failure to investigate such complaints, the complainant may approach the Financial Services Tribunal, either to give directions to the FAIS Ombud regarding how to investigate the complaint or to replace this failure with the Tribunal's own investigation/reconsideration of a decision as regulated in section 8 of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (hereafter the PAJA). An administrative decision is defined in the Financial Sector Regulation Act 9 of 2017 (hereafter the FSRA) which includes the statutory ombud (example, FAIS Ombud) decisions, such as a decision not to investigate a complaint. When an insurer's decision is in fact an administrative decision, reference should also be made to the FSRA, i.e. an insurer's decision to debar an employee/representative or a decision not to update relevant policyholder records with new information. An insurer's decision not to update policyholder records is not part of this statutory regulation (FSRA) of what constitutes an administrative decision; nevertheless the PAJA could still be relevant to understand when these decisions could be considered a public function. Although the latter falls outside the scope of this article, the National Horse Racing Authority of Southern Africa v Cyril Naidoo 2010 3 SA 182 (N) is briefly discussed in this article with reference to a public function. In this article, the failure of the FAIS Ombud to investigate a policyholder's (hereafter client) complaint (the insurer is unwilling to update client records) is an administrative decision and it is specifically regulated by FSRA. For this reason, the relevance of the Financial Services Tribunal is discussed when the FAIS Ombud directs the complaint (or the client may also refer a matter in specific circumstances, as if the FAIS Ombud fails to investigate the matter within a reasonable time) to the Financial Services Tribunal for a reconsideration of the decision.

DEFINITION AND SYSTEM OF PRINCIPLES OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL REGULATION OF STATE GOVERNANCE IN THE SPHERE OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY

This article is deals with analyze of definitions of principles, principles of law and approaches to understanding the principles of administrative law. It is emphasized that the principles of administrative law must be primary, determining; actions of participants of administrative and legal relations should be consistent with the principles of administrative law; all elements of the mechanism of administrative and legal regulation of state governance in the sphere of economic activity should function based on the principles of administrative law. Distinguish between principals of administrative law and state governance is drawn. At the same time, the principles of state governance also determine the appropriate administrative and legal regulation. It is noted that the system of principles includes the principles that are the basis for the construction of administrative regulation, its modernization and the principles of the object of such regulation, which should be ensured through administrative regulation. The latter include the principles of state governance. It is concluded that, administrative and legal regulation in the sphere of economic activity provides for taking into account also the principles of next directions: principles of economic policy; principles of state regulatory policy; principles of information security. It is explained that state governance in the relevant sphere is aimed at realization of economic function, economic policy of the state; state regulatory policy in the sphere of economic activity; provision of information security in the sphere of economic activity. These principles affect the content of administrative and legal regulation in a particular sphere, but they must be understood and interpreted through the prism of administrative law principles that are fundamental to administrative law. The article states that the creation of conditions for the fulfillment of tasks defined by the Constitution of Ukraine, which is a direction of administrative and legal regulation, which permeates all other directions, should be based on the principles of administrative law. It is proposed to highlight the basic and special principles of administrative and legal regulation of state governance in the sphere of economic activity.

Trusted notifiers and the privatization of online enforcement

Online content is increasingly enforced by private parties based on private regulation. One recent trend in the takedown of unlawful online content is the emergence of models, where trusted third parties – private or public – are given privileged notification channels for flagging infringing content.Despite increasing practical importance, these arrangements have received little scholarly attention. This article explores the functioning of trusted notifier-models and how they are addressed by the European lawmaker in the context of two intermediaries, online platforms and domain name registries. Depending on intermediary, trusted notifier-models can both be seen as extension of the existing notice-and-takedown regimes and an additional voluntary expedited-enforcement layer. The author argues that these trusted notifier-models are problematic given the broad room of autonomy that the legislator is leaving to private parties. Whereas models involving public authorities are subject to general administrative law principles as well as constitutional and human rights safeguards, the framework for private regulation (i.e. without intervention of public actors) is less clear. In the field of domain names, these legitimacy issues give raise to special concern given the detached relation between domain names and website content. The paper criticizes the lack of insights into existing arrangements and calls for increased transparency. The author concludes that a legislative minimum framework is desirable.

Die Objektivierung des Asylverfahrens aus verwaltungsrechtswissenschaftlicher Sicht

This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion about the organization and efficiency of Asylum Law. It focuses on recent changes in the Asylum procedure and current political proposals aiming at a more efficient and rapid Asylum procedure including legal remedies against negative decision in that procedure. The main theses developed in this article is that the envisaged centralization and acceleration of Asylum procedure reflects a fundamental change in the relationship between the individual and the state in which the individual is increasingly treated as a means for public interests. The paper analyzes Asylum Law through the lens of general principles of administrative law and describes how the fundamental trade of between rapidity and diligence as well as between effective return and successful integration is more and more resolved at the expense of diligence and integration.

Aдминистративно наказване в областта на обществените поръчки

This article aims to examine the main administrative punishment in the field of public procurement.The subject of the article are: how the general principles of administrative penal law are incorporated in the Public Procurement Act; the subjects of administrative and criminal liability for public procurement infringements; the composition of administrative violations in the sphere of public procurement and the penalties provided for them and the procedure for establishing administrative violations in the sphere of public procurement and imposing of administrative penalties.

Functions of the Proportionality Principle in Japanese Administrative Law

The proportionality principle (hereafter, the PP) was imported from Germany into Japanese administrative law during the interwar period. The Japanese Supreme Court has never expressly mentioned the principle itself in the opinion of the court except as an obita dictum. There are, however, several judgments that may be understood as the application of the PP. This essay questions whether the principle functions “outside” or “inside” of administrative discretion and whether it performs necessity control or balancing control. It also stands upon the premise that administrative discretion takes place in the process of the application of the law in the narrower sense, distinguished from the interpretation of law and from bare fact-finding, both of which are reserved for the judiciary. Regarding necessity control, the purpose-means construction as the core of the PP is self-evident. As for balancing control, the feature of the PP is that a particular interest is placed on one side of the scale and compared with various other interests. The Supreme Court is rather reluctant to perform such types of dichotomic balancing, but does so in certain cases. Whether such balancing is appropriate depends upon a determination of the desirable degree of judicial review, as well as an understanding of the legal structure in the relevant field. While such dichotomic balancing will provide an effective tool for judicial control, it also presents the risk of making diverse interest structures among various stakeholders invisible.

Risk-Based Approach and Pharmaceutical Compliance in the Sphere of State Supervision of Illegal Circulation of Medical Products

The article deals with the problems of introducing a risk-based approach to the regulation of federal state supervision in the sphere of circulation of medicines. The main drawbacks of the risk-based approach regulation in the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Government and Roszdravnadzor are highlighted. The discrepancy of certain provisions of the relevant acts to the principles of administrative law and the Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offences in the part relating to the assessment of the legal value of the period during which a person is considered to be subjected to administrative punishment is noted. Measures to improve the risk- based approach to the organization of state supervision in the sphere of circulation of medicines are proposed. In particular, data on the degree of compliance of the objects of control with the requirements of good practices (GxP, including GMP, GPP, GDP, etc.) and data on the presence of the objects of control systems of pharmaceutical compliance are proposed in the assessment of the risk of harm. The authors formulated the definition of the concept of pharmaceutical compliance. It is concluded that the inconsistency of the administrative-legal and criminal-legal policies to combat cartels in the EAEU member States creates significant risks to achieve the goals of creating a single market of medical products in the Eurasian Economic Union.

Global Administrative Law: The Key Aspects of Conceptualizing

The present article provides the analyses of the main aspects of the global administrative law concept been proposed at the early 2000 to explain legal particulars of the global governance phenomenon. The prime focus is intentionally made on the basic elements of the concept with the specific emphasis on the different approaches to the issue. The characteristics is given both to the narrow understanding of the global administrative law connected to the regulation of internal action of institutions of global governance, and to the wide understanding covering the system of universal norms that impact upon the procedures of national public administration. The coherence between the global governance actors (including public and private, formal and non-formal ones) and the variety of global administrative law sources is revealed. The typology of the legal orders, which compose the judicial system of global administrative law, is also given. The typology in question particularly includes traditional sources represented by norms of international public law, as well as new sources such national administrative law rules extended through international instruments, internal procedural regulations of international organizations and rules of a “soft law” generated both by public and private actors. Fundamental principles of global administrative law may be typically classified in a two set. The one set is based upon specific provisions of universal international instruments, such as the WTO agreements, the other one is created through the transformation of national principles of rule of law, good administration and due process.

ПРИНЦИПИ АДМІНІСТРАТИВНОГО ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНОГО ПРАВА У НОВІТНІХ УМОВАХ СЬОГОДЕННЯ: НАУКОВО-ПРАВОВИЙ АСПЕКТ

The article is devoted to the scientific and theoretical research of the modern system of principles of administrative procedural law in the updated conditions of development of the Ukrainian state, proceeding from the needs of quality provision and realization of the legal rights, freedoms and interests of individuals and legal entities in the field of public-legal relations. The author analyzes the regulatory requirements of administrative legislation, the provisions of the doctrine of administrative procedural law to determine the essence and significance of the basic principles that determine the nature, structure, social orientation and the main properties of legal regulation of this branch of law, and on the other – create the proper organizational and functional conditions for the implementation of administrative-processing activities. It is noted that interest in the theory of principles of administrative procedural law is due to the functional purpose of this legal category for: a) the characteristics of the system of administrative procedural law, its separate norms and institutions; b) filling gaps and eliminating conflicts in law; c) the efficiency and “efficiency” of the rules of administrative procedural law during the conduct of administrative and procedural activities. It was established all principles of administrative procedural law are characterized by: ideological orientation, democracy, universality, general significance, higher imperative, efficiency, relative stability, autonomy and certainty, normative certainty. On the basis of an analysis of existing scientific developments on the above-mentioned issues, the author supports and further develops the view on the appropriateness of the division of fundamental principles into: 1) the principles of administrative procedural law that reflect the specifics and content of this branch of law, determine its peculiarities, purpose, tasks and functional purpose; 2) administrative and procedural principles, as established by administrative-procedural legislation, basic requirements that for a long time will not undergo significant changes, determine the nature and content of the subjects of administrative-procedural legal relationships and are used at any stage of the trial (organizational and functional). Formulated scientific conclusions on selected topics are useful for the theory of administrative procedural law in general.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

In recent years there has been an increasing trend the tendency for the synchronization of administrative law in the Member States of the European Union. Representatives of the European Institutions highlight the need from codification of basic principles of administrative law, establishing rules for a European administrative procedure and adopting a European Administrative Procedure Code. The stated aspirations of the Community are an expression of the idea of building a European administrative space, in which application to find common administrative standards and values. This approach is necessary both for the better performance of European goals and ideals and for ensuring a greater protection of the rights and freedoms of European citizens.Community Member States need to be aware of European policies in each area and to adapt their national policies and strategies. In the field of administrative law, national authorities should, first of all, have sufficient knowledge of the basic principles of European administrative law. These principles are not regulated by EU law.Despite this omission of the European legislator, the Court of Justice of the European Communities has formulated in its jurisprudence the basic principles of modern European administrative law, which are common to the Member States of the Community. Such are: the principles of legality and proportionality, the principle of legal certainty, to protect legitimate expectations and equality, for a fair administrative procedure and effective judicial control. The general principles listed apply the administration of the European Union and to the Member States if they are applying the law of the European Union.Similarly, national authorities should focus their efforts on improving their administrations to reach the level of development in the European administrative space, because the key to successful European integration in each area is mutual cooperation between the European institutions and the national authorities.

Trusted Notifiers and the Privatization of Online Enforcement

Online content is increasingly enforced by private parties based on private regulation. One recent trend in the takedown of unlawful online content is the emergence of models, where trusted third parties – private or public – are given privileged notification channels for flagging infringing content. This article first explores the functioning of trusted notifier- (trusted flaggers-) models and how they are addressed by the European lawmaker in the context of online platforms. In the second part, the article turns towards models for domain name-related takedowns. The author argues that these trusted notifier- (trusted flaggers-) models are problematic given the broad room of autonomy that the legislator is leaving to private parties. The paper shows that trusted notifier-models can be seen both as a simple extension of the existing notice-and-takedown regimes and as an additional voluntary enforcement layer. Whereas models involving public authorities are subject to general administrative law principles as well as constitutional and human rights safeguards, the framework for private regulation (i.e. without intervention of public actors) is less clear. In the field of domain names, these legitimacy issues give raise to even special concern given the detached relation between domain names and website content. The paper criticizes the lack of insights into existing arrangements and calls for increased transparency. The author concludes that a legislative minimum framework is desirable.

The Standard of Review on Appeals From Domestic Arbitral Awards Should be Open to Party Agreement

One of arbitration’s defining features is its flexibility. Parties to an arbitration agreement enjoy broad discretion to design their dispute resolution process as they see fit. Despite the prominence of party autonomy as a cornerstone of arbitration, courts have at times placed limits on the procedural flexibility emblematic of arbitration. One such case is the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Dominion, wherein the Court decided that parties to an arbitration agreement may not determine in advance which standard of review the Court shall apply on the appeal of an arbitral award. This paper argues that the limit that the Court in Dominion placed on party autonomy was unwarranted. Specifically, the Court, as other courts have done, placed an over- reliance on administrative law principles without considering arbitration law principles that, if considered, would militate in favour of according parties the ability to determine their appellate standard of review in advance.

Good Governance in Respect of Women Empowerment in India

Our Indian laws and laws throughout universe are nearly connected with society and derived out of society. It truly shows the system of livelihood subsisted in society. Society cannot be stuffed to particular laws and rules. It keeps on changing as per economic, scientific and technological growth. As per changing society, it changes the rules and regulations. This is a dynamic approach of law. With changing society to change the rules and regulations this responsibility lies with legislatures and active judiciary. The administrative and discretionary actions of government are subject to judicial review. Natural justice is the principle of administrative law and it should be duty of administrator to administer the Justice on the basis of justice, equity and good conscience. It is duty of government to provide fair justice to everyone without discrimination on the basis of sex. Gender injustice is prevalent in India since from ancient period. At that time also, women were on an inferior position, but offences were not committed frequently against them. Nowadays on the name of women empowerment government providing so many legislative enactments as well as facilities in favour of women on the other hand day by day offences increasing against women. Therefore, through this article it is an attempt to interlink between how the woman empowerment in India closely connected with good governance.

Pozbawienie uprawnień wynikających z decyzji administracyjnej a realizacja zasady efektywności działania administracji

Deprivation of an entity of acquired rights deriving from an administrative act is possible through the combined application of administrative provisions of substantive and procedural law. The limits of durability acquired under an administrative decision rights are the constitutional principle of the protection of acquired rights and the general principles of administrative procedure. The permanence of the right acquired by the administrative decision is not absolute. Repeal or change of the administrative decision is possible only in the mode provided in the law, since the administrative decision makes use of the presumption of regularity. The deprivation of administrative and legal powers in the area of public law takes place in the context of an assessment of the implementation of an administrative decision carried out by a state body. This assessment is possible with the use of two procedural institutions for the expiry of an administrative decision and a substantive institution for the withdrawal of rights. The body assesses whether the addressee of an administrative act has implemented the administrative decision not only in accordance with its content but also the provisions of the generally applicable law. The deprivation of a party of an acquired right is often accompanied by the need to award damages (grant compensation). The procedure and premises for claiming compensation liability have been regulated in the provisions of substantive administrative law. The principle of the effectiveness of public administration bodies is one of the basic principles of administrative law. Its application is not limited only to the creation of law, but also includes the application of law by public administration bodies. The problem of the efficiency of operations of state bodies is of particular importance not only in the area of enforceability of an administrative decision, but also its authorising function. The efficiency of operations of entities in the State structure is assessed through the prism of the implementation of a given administrative decision.