Reason and Authority in Administrative Law

Grant, Jack H.

doi:10.1017/s0008197317000599

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In principle, such interference should be prudent and rational though. 4 In particular, courts should be very careful when approaching all decisions issued within the limits of the discretionary power available to the administration. Such decisions should be subjected to particularly in-depth analyses but any potential interference with their contents should only take place in one of the three cases indicated above.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

May, Should, or Do, Administrative Judges Participate in the Management of the Public Sphere in the Rule of Law?

Szot

2019

Int J Semiot Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article concerns the actual impact of courts controlling the activity of public administration on the direction of its activities and the content of issued decisions. In particular, it concerns sovereign individual decisions that affect the sphere of civil rights and freedoms. The aim of the article is to seek an answer to the question of whether independent judges actually participate in the process of management in the public sphere, which is characterised by elements of politics and (regardless of the answer to this question) whether such participation is allowed or (even) necessary in modern rule of law states. The main argument is that regardless of whether the courts controlling the administration have reformatory or exclusive cassation powers, they influence the decision-making process in the public sphere. At the same time, such influence not only does not violate the fundamental values of the rule of law, but is even sometimes necessary. This does not mean that courts should interfere in the management processes in the public sphere in every case.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

May, Should, or Do, Administrative Judges Participate in the Management of the Public Sphere in the Rule of Law?

Szot

2019

Int J Semiot Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Nullity of Administrative Acts: Grounds, Legal Regime, Discretion

Sherstoboev

2021

jour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The issues of criteria for the nullity of administrative acts are considered, the ratio of an illegal and invalid act, as well as a null and void act, analyzed, the possibility of administrative discretion in determining an invalid administrative act is analyzed, the role of vague legal concepts when an administrative act is declared invalid is demonstrated. The Author uses a comparative legal method, including the analysis of the practice of Germany, Great Britain, South Africa, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Russia and other countries. Special attention is paid to the laws on administrative procedures adopted in the post-Soviet territory and the influence of the German doctrine on this process. It is concluded that for the continental legal order the most preferable way to formalize the criteria for the invalidity of an administrative act are laws on administrative procedures or their analogs, while in the common law states, legal doctrine and judicial practice are of great importance. At the same time, many countries avoid recognizing acts as null and void, preferring the construction of their voidability. This is related to ensuring the stability of public administration, the predictability of administrative activities, and the protection of legitimate expectations. In any case, the theory of the reality of the administrative act is prevailing, and nullity is rather viewed as an anomaly. Therefore, only acts that are adopted with the most significant violations, which do not allow talking about the fair consequences of their adoption, are considered invalid. The illegality of an act does not automatically entail its nullity. A similar trend can be traced in Russia, although individual norms of law and practice of courts indicate the possible formation of a doctrine of the invalidity of an administrative act in the Russian legal system. Insignificant acts do not give rise to consequences from the moment of their adoption, legally they do not exist, and nothing can generate anything. With this approach, the courts only fix the criterion of invalidity without a dispute about law. Insignificant acts should be distinguished from contested ones, the latter may turn out to be illegal, but for a number of reasons (for example, protection of trust) the fact of their existence is confirmed along with their consequences.

show abstract

The Legitimacy of Circular Letter in Handling COVID-19 Pandemic

Disantara

2020

Rechtsidee

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this legal research is to analyze the relevance of the discretion of government officials during the COVID-19 pandemic with the concepts and legislation related to legal issues; as well as analyzing the existence of a Circular to legitimize the handling of COVID-19 with statutory regulations. This legal research is carried out by making an inventory of various primary and secondary legal materials, so as to obtain relevant and critical studies of the legal issues discussed. The results of this legal research are that the discretion made by government officials can be justified legally if it is relevant to several provisions contained in legislation for the realization of good emergency governance; and the existence of a circular letter is legally valid if it is in accordance with the laws and regulations and the General Principles of Good Governance, by understanding that a circular is not a product of rules that are in the order of national legislation. Thus, a circular does not have strong and binding legal legitimacy. Therefore, the researcher recommends the criteria and classification of the parameters of discretion in the form of a circular as outlined in the form of a Supreme Court Regulation. This should be done so that there is no abuse of authority in implementing discretionary power by government officials and general legal principles.

show abstract

Reason and Authority in Administrative Law

Cited by 3 publications

References 37 publications

May, Should, or Do, Administrative Judges Participate in the Management of the Public Sphere in the Rule of Law?

May, Should, or Do, Administrative Judges Participate in the Management of the Public Sphere in the Rule of Law?

Nullity of Administrative Acts: Grounds, Legal Regime, Discretion

The Legitimacy of Circular Letter in Handling COVID-19 Pandemic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About