To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Administrative review.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Administrative review'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 dissertations / theses for your research on the topic 'Administrative review.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse dissertations / theses on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Hardiman-McCartney, Anna Marie. "Substantive review in English administrative law." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2010. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.608767.
Full text
2
Nguyen, Van Quang. "GROUNDS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION: AN ANALYSIS OF VIETNAMESE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW." 名古屋大学法政国際教育協力研究センター(CALE), 2010. http://hdl.handle.net/2237/20098.
Full text
3
Daly, P. "Curial deference and standards of review in administrative law." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2011. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.598255.
Full textAbstract:
Why should courts defer to administrative decision-makers? What means should courts employ to ensure that they accord the right degree of deference to administrative decision-makers? When should courts defer to administrative decision-makers? In chapters 1 and 2, I explain my reliance on legislative intent and I argue that properly considered it suggests courts should be deferential to administrative decision-makers and accord them a variable degree of curial deference. I the first instance, legislatures have delegated variable extents of power to administrators, which counsels not only judicial restraint, but variable amounts of judicial restraint. In the second instance, a proper consideration of the relevant statutory provisions may reveal reasons for the delegation of power, what I call practical justifications for curial deference: expertise, complexity, democratic legitimacy, and procedural legitimacy. These practical justifications are variable in nature and should, if contained in statutes, be taken into account by reviewing courts. The arguments based on the delegation of power and on practical justification both suggest that reviewing courts should implement a variable standard of review to give effect to legislative intent. In chapter 3, I develop such a variable standard of review, I analyse the concept of reasonableness in the context of judicial review and elaborate on its internal reason and structure, thereby establishing its legitimacy. In chapters 4 and 5, I argue that the doctrine of curial deference developed in the previous chapters should have a wide scope. I suggest that the employment of complex concepts such as ‘jurisdiction’, ‘error of law’ and ‘justiciability’ as organising principles in judicial review may frustrate legislative intent. I urge instead that reviewing courts should undertaken a general inquiry into reasonableness whenever an exercise of delegated powers is impugned, except where fundamental rights have allegedly been infringed.
4
Reid, A. C. A., and n/a. "An examination of overlap in the Australian Federal system of review of administrative decisions : and some suggestions for change." University of Canberra. Management, 1990. http://erl.canberra.edu.au./public/adt-AUC20061107.104025.
Full text
5
Plasket, Clive. "The fundamental right to just administrative action: judicial review of administrative action in the democratic South Africa." Thesis, Rhodes University, 2003. http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1003208.
Full textAbstract:
For most of its existence South African administrative law has been shaped by the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty – the heart of the constitutional order from 1910 to 1994 – and a racist political system that favoured the white minority at the expense of the black majority. In these circumstances, the rules of administrative law were of limited use in protecting the individual from exercises of administrative power that infringed fundamental human rights, often on a grand scale. On 27 April 1994, however, a new political and constitutional order came into existence that swept away the very foundations of the old order: parliamentary sovereignty was replaced by constitutional supremacy and the racial exclusivity of the old order was replaced by a commitment to equality, freedom and dignity in a democratic state. A justiciable Bill of Rights was at centre stage in this new order. That Bill of Rights includes a fundamental right to just administrative action. It is both the new constitutional order and this rather unusual fundamental right that have changed the nature of South African administrative law. This thesis examines the effect of the fundamental right to just administrative action on the law and practice of the judicial review of administrative action. It does so principally by examining the legal position before and after 27 April 1994 with particular reference to: what is meant by administrative action; the exercise of administrative power by private bodies regulated by the rules of administrative law, on the one hand, and exercises of private power regulated by rules of private law, on the other; the rules of standing, the notion of justiciability and the constitutionality of rules that seek to limit the right of the individual to approach a court to review administrative action; the meaning and scope of the right to lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair administrative action, in terms of the common law, the Constitution and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000; the meaning, scope and efficacy of the rights to reasons for administrative actions and of access to information; the procedure of judicial review and remedies that may be granted for the infringement of a person’s right to just administrative action; and conclusions and recommendations with regard to progress made in the construction of South Africa’s new, democratically based, administrative law.
6
Webb, M. D. "Local purchasing initiatives : a review." Thesis, Aston University, 1992. http://publications.aston.ac.uk/10859/.
Full textAbstract:
A number of alternative approaches are available to stimulate local purchasing, requiring various levels of resources. However, none of the initiatives studied could provide evidence that they generated many links between local companies. The findings of the research suggest that this is largely due to the purchasing practices adopted by large companies, which no longer provide opportunities for the small local supplier. In view of this it was concluded that Local Purchasing Initiatives should focus on encouraging inter-trading between companies of all sizes, rather than just large buyers and small suppliers.
7
Jordao, Eduardo. "L'adaptation de l'intensité du contrôle juridictionnel aux caractéristiques de l'action administrative contrôlée." Thesis, Paris 1, 2014. http://www.theses.fr/2014PA010310.
Full textAbstract:
L’objet de cette étude est l’adaptation de l’intensité du contrôle juridictionnel aux caractéristiques de l’action administrative contrôlée. L’examen est fait à la lumière de quatre systèmes juridiques : Canada, États-Unis, France et Italie. L’origine de l’intérêt scientifique réside dans le constat d’une progressive complexité matérielle et institutionnelle de l’administration publique et dans le doute à propos de l’adaptation du droit administratif à cette circonstance. Ce travail a enquêté sur la question de l’adaptation du droit administratif en ce qui concerne un point très spécifique : l’intensité du contrôle juridictionnel de l’administration publique. Voilà la question-clé : comment adapter l’intensité du contrôle juridictionnelle à la complexité de l’administration publique contemporaine ? A cet égard, il est souvent soutenu dans des différents forums que l’adaptation du droit à la complexité administrative exigerait de faire consacrer une solution spécifique : un contrôle juridictionnel limité, peu intense (déférent). Cette solution serait prétendument plus adéquate aux circonstances factuelles présentes que n’importe quelle alternative. Contrairement à cette idée, la thèse soutenue ici est la suivante : il existe une pluralité de formes et de degrés par lesquels l’intensité du contrôle juridictionnel peut être adaptée à la complexité de l’administration publique contemporaine, aucune solution n’étant abstraitement supérieure aux autresNo English summary available
8
Thackeray, Vincent Gregory. "Inconsistencies in the rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions /." [St. Lucia, Qld.], 2001. http://adt.library.uq.edu.au/public/adt-QU20020821.171741/index.html.
Full text
9
Yau, Kwai-chong Eliza. "A critical review of the District Administrative Scheme in Hong Kong." Click to view the E-thesis via HKUTO, 2006. http://sunzi.lib.hku.hk/hkuto/record/B36429788.
Full text
10
Yau, Kwai-chong Eliza, and 尤桂莊. "A critical review of the District Administrative Scheme in Hong Kong." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 2006. http://hub.hku.hk/bib/B36429788.
Full text
11
Halliday, Simon. "Judicial review and administrative justice : a study of administrative decision-making in three local government homeless persons units." Thesis, University of Strathclyde, 2000. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.366939.
Full text
12
Makris, Maria C. "The distinct use and development of administrative law principles by the European Court of Justice." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 1991. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.240041.
Full text
13
Sunkin, Maurice. "The use and the impact of judicial review in England and Wales." Thesis, University of Essex, 2002. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.369365.
Full text
14
Chai, Man-hon, and 柴文瀚. "Neither recentralization nor decentralization: a review of district administrative scheme since 2008." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 2010. http://hub.hku.hk/bib/B46760350.
Full text
15
Stewart, Gayle Lorraine. "Repositioning BC ferries : from Crown corporation to administrative hybrid." Thesis, University of British Columbia, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/2429/2646.
Full textAbstract:
In this paper. I analyze how political, economic, and administrative issues were major factors in the BC Liberal government's creation of a complex hybrid operating structure for BC Ferries. The model evolved as the result of a number of circumstances, including the former NDP government's "fast ferry" debacle and the Liberal government's decision to conduct a Core Services Review of all government services, including those provided by Crown corporations. BC Ferries' new structure has similarities to other administrative models that have been introduced as a result of New Public Management initiatives and other factors in a number of Westminster jurisdictions. The resulting operating entities are having significant impacts on the nature and scope of public accountabilities and on reporting structures.
16
Obadina, Derek Adetokunboh. "Impact of judicial review on local authority decision-making processes." Thesis, Cardiff University, 1988. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.244814.
Full text
17
Richards, Martinez Orisell. "Los recursos administrativos en Cuba : fundamentos teoricos de su regimen juridico." Thesis, Paris 10, 2016. http://www.theses.fr/2016PA100024.
Full textAbstract:
La thèse entend établir les fondements théoriques des recours administratifs en tenant compte des présupposés liés au contrôle de l'administration sur elle-même et à la garantie des droits des administrés. Elle confronte ensuite ces fondements à la situation juridique en vigueur aujourd'hui à Cuba, et propose des réformes pour rendre la réglementation cohérente avec ces présupposés théoriquesThis thesis aims to establish the theoretical grounds for administrative remedies, taking into account the presuppositions deriving from the control of public administration by itself, and the protection of citizen's rights. It faces those grounds with the actual legal organisation in Cuba, and propose reforms with the purpose to let the legal regulation be consistent with these theoretical grounds
18
Fleming, Gabriel Catherine. "Rival goals and values in administrative review: a study of migration decision making." University of Sydney. Law, 2001. http://hdl.handle.net/2123/839.
Full textAbstract:
Some form of administrative review of executive action is accepted in the common law world for the reason that it serves certain basic values and goals. This study draws on political, legal and management theory in considering the values that underlie administrative review. It is primarily concerned with the role of tribunal review. A full range of values are considered, including fairness, justice, consistency, rationality, dignity, respect, accessibility, equity, efficiency and economy. Some are seen as fundamental to the administrative review system while others have different purposes. There is general agreement on many of the values and goals of administrative review. In their practical application however, values compete, overlap and evolve in accordance with economic, social, political and legal change. There are value tensions in, for instance, the role of independent tribunals as a check on the power of the executive while they are also within the executive, in the extent of the obligation on administrative tribunals to apply government policy and in the setting of proper limits of judicial review. There is continuing tension in demands for individual dignity and rights to fair treatment on the one hand and notions of the 'public interest' on the other. This thesis argues that the provision of tribunal review of administrative decisions is increasingly ideologically driven and focussed on 'functional' or 'management' values. At times these have trumped other values in decisions about entitlements to procedural fairness, access to review, effectiveness in public administration and the achievement of the 'correct and preferable' decision in the instant case. The focus of this thesis is a case study of migration decision-making. The importance of this area of study is evident in the potentially devastating consequences that migration decisions can have for individuals and families. In the context of Australia's history of inadequate and racially based migration policies, independent administrative review provides security against arbitrariness and discrimination in decision-making. An analysis of administrative review of decisions made under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) by the Migration Review Tribunal, and its predecessor the Immigration Review Tribunal, illustrates the claim that values, in their application, have real, practical and local importance. Issues of tribunal independence and accountability, the normative goal of review and procedural justice are considered in depth. It is argued that where compromises are made in administrative review, underlying values should be revealed so that their practical consequences may be better understood. The need to articulate and analyze these issues has never been greater. The Australian administrative review system is in a period of change analogous to that of the introduction of the 'new' administrative law in the 1970s. If tribunals are to continue to play an effective role then it is important to think clearly about how they can, in practice, embody the right mix of administrative law values.
19
Armstrong, Gillian Claire. "Administrative justice and tribunals in South Africa : a commonwealth comparison." Thesis, Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/17997.
Full textAbstract:
Thesis (LLM )--Stellenbosch University, 2011.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In the field of administrative law, the judiciary has traditionally exercised control over the administrative actions of the executive through judicial review. However, judicial review is neither the most effective nor the most efficient primary control mechanism for systemic administrative improvement. In a country faced with a task of =transformative constitutionalism‘, and hindered with scarce resources, there is good cause to limit judicial intervention as the first response to administrative disputes. The major theme of this thesis is to investigate the feasibility of administrative tribunal reform in South Africa, using two other commonwealth countries, Australia and England, as a basis for comparison. Australia and England have been chosen for comparison because they share similar administrative law traditions and they can provide working models of coherent tribunal structures. The Australian tribunal system is well-established and consists of tribunals which fall under the control of the executive, while tribunals in England have recently undergone a significant transformation, and are now part of the independent judiciary. The South African government currently spends, indeed wastes, a significant amount of money on administrative law litigation. Due to the limitations of judicial review, even after the high costs of litigation and the long duration of court proceedings, the results achieved may still be unsatisfactory. Furthermore, judicial review is unsuited to giving effect to systemic administrative change and the improvement of initial decision-making. Australia and England have begun to move away from the traditional court model for the resolution of administrative disputes. Both have indicated a preference for the important role of tribunals in the administration of disputes. Tribunals have been shown to offer the advantage of being speedier, cheaper, more efficient, more participatory and more accessible than traditional courts, which contributes to tribunals being a more available resource for lay people or people without sophisticated legal knowledge, and provides wider access to remedies than courts. The English and Australian models indicate a few important trends which need to be applied universally to ensure a sustained tribunal reform and a system which provides a higher level of administrative redress than the over-burdened and institutionally inept courts currently do. These include co-operation among government departments and tribunals; open and accountable systemic change; the need for supervision and evaluation of the whole of administrative law by an independent and competent body; and ultimately a focus on the needs of users of state services. At the same time, there are arguments against administrative tribunal reform. These include the costs of reform; the ways to establish tribunals; and the level of independence shown by the tribunals. These arguments are especially relevant in the South African context, where the government faces huge social problems and a scarcity of resources. However, after an analysis of the valuable characteristics of tribunals and the role that they serve in the day to day administration of justice, it is difficult to see how these objections to tribunals can outweigh their potential importance in the administrative justice system. The need for sustained systematic reform in South Africa is one that cannot be ignored. Tribunals offer a valuable alternative to judicial review for the resolution of administrative disputes. Furthermore, the tribunal systems of Australia and England demonstrate how the effective creation and continued use of comprehensive tribunal structures contributes firstly to cost reduction and secondly to ease the administrative burden on courts who are not suited to cure large-scale administrative error.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In die administratiefreg oefen die regsprekende gesag tradisioneel beheer uit oor die uitvoerende gesag deur middel van geregtelike hersiening. Geregtelike hersiening is egter nie die mees doeltreffende of effektiewe primêre beheermeganisme om sistemiese administratiewe verbetering teweeg te bring nie. In 'n land met die uitdagings van 'transformatiewe konstitusionalisme‘ en skaars hulpbronne, kan 'n goeie argument gevoer word dat geregtelike inmenging as die eerste antwoord op administratiewe dispute beperk moet word. Die deurlopende tema van hierdie tesis is 'n ondersoek na die lewensvatbaarheid van hervorming van administratiewe tribunale in Suid-Afrika, in vergelyking met die posisie in Australië en Engeland, waarvan beide ook, tesame met Suid-Afrika, deel vorm van die Statebond. Hierdie lande is gekies vir regsvergelykende studie aangesien hulle 'n administratiefregtelike tradisie met Suid-Afrika deel en beide werkende modelle van duidelike tribunale strukture daarstel. Die Australiese tribunale stelsel is goed gevestig en bestaan uit tribunale onder die beheer van die uitvoerende gesag, terwyl die tribunale stelsel in Engeland onlangs 'n beduidende hervorming ondergaan het en nou deel van die onafhanklike regsprekende gesag is. Die Suid-Afrikaanse regering mors aansienlike hoeveelhede geld op administratiefregtelike litigasie. Selfs na hoë koste en lang vertragings van litigasie mag die resultate steeds onbevredigend wees as gevolg van die beperkings inherent aan geregtelike hersiening. Tesame met hierdie oorwegings is geregtelike hersiening ook nie gerig op sistemiese administratiewe verandering en verbetering van aanvanklike besluitneming nie. Australië en Engeland het onlangs begin wegbeweeg van die tradisionele hof-gebaseerde model vir die oplossing van administratiewe dispute. Beide toon 'n voorkeur vir die belangrike rol wat tribunale in die administrasie van dispute kan speel Tribunale bied die bewese voordele om vinniger, goedkoper, meer doeltreffend, meer deelnemend en meer toeganklik te wees as tradisionele howe, sodat tribunale 'n meer beskikbare hulpbron is vir leke, oftewel, persone sonder gesofistikeerde regskennis en dus beter toegang tot remedies as tradisionele howe verskaf. Die Engelse en Australiese modelle dui op enkele belangrike tendense wat universeel toegepas moet word om volgehoue tribunale hervorming te verseker en om =n stelsel te skep wat 'n hoër vlak van administratiewe geregtigheid daarstel as wat oorlaaide en institusioneel onbekwame howe kan. Dit verwys bepaald na samewerking tussen staatsdepartemente en tibunale; deursigtige en verantwoordbare sistemiese veranderinge; die behoefte aan toesighouding en evaluasie van die hele administratiefreg deur 'n onafhanklike, bevoegde liggaam; en uiteindelik 'n fokus op die behoeftes van die gebruikers van staatsdienste. Daar is egter terselfdertyd ook argumente teen administratiewe tribunale hervorming. Hierdie argumente sluit in die koste van hervorming; die wyses waarop tribunale gevestig word; en die vlak van onafhanklikheid voorgehou deur tribunale. Hierdie argumente is veral relevant in die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks waar die regering voor groot sosiale probleme te staan kom en daarby ingesluit, 'n tekort aan hulpbronne ook moet hanteer. Daarenteen is dit moeilik om in te sien hoe enige teenkanting en teenargumente met betrekking tot die vestiging van administratiewe tribunale swaarder kan weeg as die potensiële belang van sulke tribunale in die administratiewe geregtigheidstelsel, veral nadat 'n analise van die waardevolle karaktereienskappe van tribunale en die rol wat hulle speel in die dag-tot-dag administrasie van geregtigheid onderneem is. Die behoefte aan volhoubare sistemiese hervorming in Suid-Afrika kan nie geïgnoreer word nie. Tribunale bied 'n waardevolle alternatief tot geregtelike hersiening met die oog op die oplossing van administratiewe dispute. Tesame hiermee demonstreer die tribunale stelsels in Australië en Engeland hoe die doeltreffende vestiging en deurlopende gebruik van omvattende tribunale bydra, eerstens om kostes verbonde aan die oplossing van administratiewe dispute te verlaag en tweedens, om die administratiewe las op die howe, wat nie aangelê is daarvoor om grootskaalse administratiewe foute reg te stel nie, te verlig.
20
Thomson, Stephen. "The constitutional basis of judicial review in Scotland." Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/1842/25785.
Full textAbstract:
The thesis examines the constitutional position of the Court of Session's supervisory jurisdiction. It begins by emphasising the methodological and substantive importance of the historicality and traditionality of law. It then provides a detailed historical account of the emergence of the Court's supervisory jurisdiction, from its inheritance of supervisory functions from emanations of the King's Council to the present-day law of judicial review. Throughout, emphasis is placed on the Court's strong sense of self-orientation in the wider legal and constitutional order, and the extent to which it defined its own supervisory jurisdiction. The court was a powerful constitutional actor and played a strong role in the increasing centralisation and systematisation of the legal order, expanding its supervisory purview through a powerful triumvirate of remedies (advocation, suspension and reduction) and a comprehensive approach to the supervision of a wide range of bodies. The thesis then frames tensions between Parliament and the Court in the context of judicial review of ouster clauses, chosen as a point of heightened inter-institutional tension. This is demonstrated to be an area in which divergent visions of the constitution are evident – Parliament regarding itself as entitled to oust the jurisdiction of the Court to judicially review, and the Court regarding itself as entitled to examine and pronounce on the extent of ouster, including its limitation or exclusion. In attempting to conciliate these divergent constitutional worldviews, the thesis rejects a “last word” approach which prevails in the English judicial review literature. It considers (and rejects), as alternatives, dialogue theories and functional departmentalism. The thesis then advances constitutional narratology as its preferred analytical framework for the accommodation of those inter-institutional tensions, and conciliation of their divergent worldviews. The Court's performance of a constitutional-narratological function facilitates the integration, conciliation and synthesis of legal norms with an existing law and legal system; weaves and coagulates multifarious legal norms into a unified and univocal body of norms; and executes a chronicling, expository and explanatory storytelling function which sets a legally-authoritative narrative to the law. In doing so, the Court performs a distinctive and indispensable constitutional function incapable of fulfilment by Parliament. It is argued that traditionality and functional necessity provide the legal-systemic legitimation for the Court's performance of the constitutional-narratological function. Finally, the thesis considers the institutional specificity of the function, concluding that it is the function, rather than the institution, that is indispensable. However, neither the advent of the Upper Tribunal nor the U.K. Supreme Court suggest at this stage that the Court's performance of that function is waning.
21
Defoort, Benjamin. "La décision administrative." Thesis, Paris 2, 2012. http://www.theses.fr/2012PA020097.
Full textAbstract:
Expression la plus caractéristique du pouvoir de l’administration, la décision administrative est une notion familière. Pourtant, les données observables en droit positif s’avèrent hétérogènes et contingentes, compromettant la possibilité d’en circonscrire la teneur. Et derrière un consensus apparent, les présentations doctrinales de l’action adminis-trative unilatérale se caractérisent par un éclatement terminologique et conceptuel. Le choix a été fait de construire une définition, à partir d’une analyse critique du droit positif et du discours doctrinal, pour en éprouver les mérites en vue d’une meilleure compréhension de l’administration et de son droit. Signification impérative d’une manifestation de volonté uni-latérale et arrêtée d’une autorité administrative, la décision administrative constitue un utile outil d’analyse du pouvoir de l’administration, du contrôle du juge sur celui-ci et de la place à laquelle les citoyens peuvent prétendre dans son élaboration et sa mise en oeuvre. Distincte de l’incitation ou de la déclaration d’intention, la décision demeure le mode privilégié de direction de la conduite des citoyens et l’objet principal du contrôle du juge sur la légalité de l’action administrative. La portée explicative de cette définition est complétée par la compréhension qu’elle autorise des usages stratégiques que les acteurs du droit administratif peuvent en faire. En tant que signification, la décision révèle les luttes qu’ils mènent pour l’identification, au cas concret, de la portée des divers actes de l’administration ; enjeu de pouvoir, elle fait ressortir les stratégies de légitimation qui entourent son emploi par les autorités publiquesOne of the most characteristic expression of the administrative activities, the administrative decision is a familiar concept. Nevertheless, positive law on this subject turns out to be disparate and contingent. And behind a seeming consensus, the authors pre-sent the unilateral administrative actions with real terminological and conceptual disparities. The choice has been made to build a definition, from a critical analysis of positive law and doctrinal views, so as to test its merits with an eye to a better understanding of the Admin-istration and its law. Imperative meaning of a fixed and unilateral act of will of an adminis-trative body, the administrative decision is a useful tool to analyse the power of the Admin-istration, the judicial review of it and the place that citizens can aspire to in the process of its making and its implementation. Distinct from incitation or mere declaration of intent, deci-sion remains the preferred way of directing citizens behaviour and the main object of the judicial review of administrative acts. The explanatory impact of this definition is supple-mented by the understanding it enables of the strategical uses that actors of administrative law make of it. As a meaning, decision reveals the struggles they wage to identify, in a specif-ic case, the impact of the various acts of administrative bodies ; as a power issue, it brings out the strategies of legitimization that surround its use par public authorities
22
Freckelton, Alan. "The concept of deference in substantive review of administrative decisions in four common law countries." Thesis, University of British Columbia, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/2429/43812.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis examines the concept of “deference” in relation to judicial review of administrative decisions in Canada, and then compares this approach to judicial review to that which exists in the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia. Canadian courts have adopted a system of “substantive review” of administrative decisions, at least since 1979 (if not earlier), and will generally show deference to the decision-maker. It is important to note that Canadian courts have interpreted the word “deference” not as subservience (an approach that would make judicial review pointless), but as a form of “respectful attention” to the decision under review. Canadian courts recognise that they do not have a monopoly of wisdom on matters of statutory interpretation, but will step in to set a decision aside when that decision is unreasonable in some sense. Courts in the United Kingdom have recognised at least since 1987 that the classic standard of Wednesbury unreasonableness – that the decision is “so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have made it” – is not suitable for all kinds of administrative decisions, and have moved to a system whereby there is a “variegated standard” of reasonableness on judicial review for matters not covered by the Human Rights Act 1998, and a proportionality approach for those that are. The law in New Zealand is not as clear, because the Supreme Court has yet to squarely approach the issue, but the lower courts certainly appear to be moving in a similar direction. However, Australian courts vehemently deny that they show any deference to administrative decision-makers, and Australian academic commentators are equally insistent that such an approach is legally suspect at best and mere obsequiousness to government at worst. This is despite the fact that Australia has always recognised Wednesbury unreasonableness as a ground of judicial review. This thesis attempts to dispel some of the Australian arguments against a deference approach, particularly in relation to s.75 of the Australian Constitution, and concludes that Australia would be best off adopting a form of substantive review of administrative decisions, similar to that which exists in Canada.
23
Leatherbee, Charles Frederick 1976. "Site plan review in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts : authoritative abuse or administrative method for regulation." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2004. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/26727.
Full textAbstract:
Thesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Architecture, 2004.This electronic version was submitted by the student author. The certified thesis is available in the Institute Archives and Special Collections.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-70).
by Charles Frederick Leatherbee.
S.M.
24
Binlebdah, Naif faisal Abdulaziz. "A legal comparative study of judicial review of administrative action in Saudi and English Law." Thesis, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, 2009. https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.506676.
Full text
25
Phanyane, Namadzavho California. "The applicability of the promotion of Administrative Justice Act in review of CCMA arbitration awards." Thesis, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, 2010. http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1282.
Full textAbstract:
South Africa’s employment law has undergone more frequent and dynamic changes than any area of the law, in recent years. The ability of employers and employees to regulate their respective rights and duties vis-à-vis each other by independent agreement has been progressively whittled down by statutory intervention. In so limiting the capacity of parties to the employment relationship to regulate the nature of their relationship, South Africa has followed development in Western industrialised nations. Against this background, the drafters of the Labour Relations Act1 (LRA), as amended, proposed a comprehensive framework of law governing the collective relations between employers and trade unions in all sectors of the economy. The LRA2 created a specialised set of forums and tribunals to deal with labour and employment related matters. It established Bargaining Councils, the Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA), the Labour Court (LC) and the Labour Appeal Court (LAC). It also created procedures designed to accomplish the objective of simple, inexpensive and accessible resolution of labour disputes. In redesigning labour law, the legislature decided that some disputes between employers and employees should be dealt with by arbitrators and others by judges. It is this distinction that resulted in the creation of the CCMA and the Labour Court to perform arbitration and adjudication respectively. The result of adjudication is generally subject to appeal to a higher court. The result of arbitration is generally subject to review. Arbitration was given statutory recognition in South Africa by the Arbitration Act3. That Act provides a framework within which parties in dispute may if they wish appoint their own “judge” and supply him or her with their terms of reference tailored to their needs. With the foregoing in mind, the purpose of this work is the provision of a selection of landmark cases that dealt with the review function of CCMA awards. This selection 1 Act 66 of 1995 as amended comprises of landmark judgments of the different courts of the land. The study uses, as it departure point, legislative framework to elicit the extent to which review is extended to the litigants. Apart from looking at the legislative provisions towards review grounds, reference is made to specific landmark judgments that have an effect on this subject in order to provide a comprehensive and explicit picture of how CCMA arbitration awards may be taken on review. This study focuses on substantive law developed by the Labour Court, High Court, Supreme Court of Appeal and finally the Constitutional Court. This is informed by the very nature and scope of the study because any concentration on procedural and evidentiary aspects of review could lead to failure to achieve the objectives of the study. It looks at specific South African case law, judgments of the courts and the jurisprudence in the field of employment law so that the reader is presented with a clearer picture of recent developments in addressing review of arbitration awards. The concluding remarks are drawn from a variety of approaches used by the authorities in the field of employment law in dealing with review of CCMA arbitration awards and issues for further research are highlighted.
26
Hopkins, Elana. "Grounds for review of administrative action : the interaction between the constitution, the act and the common law." Thesis, Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2000. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/51779.
Full textAbstract:
Thesis (LLM)--University of Stellenbosch, 2000.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: South African administrative law has undergone drastic changes since the inception of the interim Constitution, which elevated 'administrative justice' to a constitutionally entrenched fundamental right in section 24. Although the successor of this section, the 'must administrative action' clause in section 33 FC, did not enter into force on 5 February 1996 with the rest of the Constitution, it required more changes to administrative law in the form of legislation, when read together with item 23 Schedule 6 FC. The two most significant factors that brought about change were the passage of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 in terms of section 33 FC read with item 23 Schedule 6, and the ruling of the Constitutional Court in the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers case. This study shows that in order to give effect to the requirements of the Constitution, the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act and the ruling of the Constitutional Court, administrative law must be reorganised. When this happens, section 33 FC, which gives force to the common law that informs administrative law, becomes the starting point in administrative law matters. Although the Act exists under the Constitution and parallel to the common law, Parliament foresees that the Act and the common law will in time become one system of law. It further provides for the direct application of the Constitution by those who cannot find a remedy in the Act. The study further shows that, as not all the common law constitutional principles that previously provided the common law grounds for review of administrative action have been taken up by the Constitution, the possibility exists that some of the common law grounds do not continue to be relevant to the review of administrative action. The Act, which articulates the right to 'just administrative action' as viewed by government, contains most of the common law grounds for review. It is therefore argued that, after the Act has entered into force, the continued relevance of those that have been omitted from the Act, needs to be determined before they can be used through the direct application of section 33 FC. To test for relevance, the requirements in section 33(1) Fe, 'lawfulness', reasonableness' and 'procedural fairness', are therefore interpreted in the study in order to determine which statutory grounds relate to each and which common law grounds have been omitted from the Act. The conclusion reached is that grounds available for the review of administrative action consist of the statutory grounds for review together with the omitted common law grounds that continue to be relevant to the judicial review of administrative action.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Sedert die inwerkingtreding van die interim Grondwet, wat 'administratiewe gerigtigheid' tot 'n grondwetlike reg verhef het in artikel 24, het die Suid-Afrikaanse administratiefreg drastiese veranderinge ondergaan. Al het die reg op 'n 'regverdige administratiewe optrede' in artikel33 FG nie op 5 Februarie 1996 in werking getree saam met die res van die Grondwet nie, het die klousule nog veranderinge, in die vorm van wetgewing, vereis. Die twee belangrikste faktore wat veranderinge to gevolg gehad het, was die aanneming van die Wet op die Bevordering van Administratiewe Geregtigheid, Wet 3 van 2000, en die beslissing van die Konstitusionele Hof in die Pharmaceutical Manufacturers-saak. Hierdie studie bevind dat die administratiefreg heringedeel sal moet word om effek te gee aan die vereistes van die Grondwet, die Wet op die Bevordering van Administratiewe Geregtigheid en die beslissing van die Konstitutionele Hof. As dit plaasvind, word artikel 33 FG, wat aan die gemenereg krag verleën, die beginpunt in administratiefregtelike aangeleenthede. Al bestaan die Wet onder die Grondwet en parallel tot die gemenereg, voorsien die regering dat die Wet en die gemenereg in die toekoms een stelsel word. Daar word verder voorsiening gemaak vir die direkte toegpassing van artikel33 deur persone wat nie 'n remedie in die Wet kan vind nie. Die studie bevind verder dat, omdat al die gemeenregtelike konstitusionele beginsels wat voorheen die gronde van hersiening verskaf het nie in die Grondwet opgeneem is nie, die moontlikheid bestaan dat sekere van die gemeenregtelike gronde nie relevant bly vir die hersiening van administratiewe handelinge nie. Die Wet, wat die reg op 'n '[r]egverdige administratiewe optrede' verwoord soos dit gesien word deur die regering, bevat meeste van die gemeenregtelike gronde van hersiening. Daarom word daar geargumenteer dat die voortgesette relevantheid van die gemeenregtelike gronde van hersiening wat uitgelaat is uit die Wet eers bepaal moet word voordat hulle gebruik kan word deur die direkte toepassing van artikel 33 nadat die Wet in werking getree het. Om te toets vir relevantheid, moet die vereistes in artikel 33 FG, 'regmatigheid', 'redelikheid' en 'prosedurele billikheid' geïnterpreteer word om te bepaal watter statutêre gronde onder elk klassifiseer en watter gemmenregtelike gronde uitgelaat is uit die Wet. Die gevolgtrekking is dat die gronde van hersiening beskikbaar vir die hersiening van administratiewe handelinge bestaan uit statutêre gronde van hersiening sowel as die weggelate gemeenregtelike gronde van hersiening wat relevant bly vir die judisiële hersiening van administratiewe handelinge.
27
Bednar, Jeannine. "The extent to which review for unreasonableness is meaningfully incorporated in the promotion of Administrative Justice Act No. 3 of 2000." Thesis, Rhodes University, 2006. http://eprints.ru.ac.za/320/.
Full text
28
Nason, S. "Judicial review in England and Wales : a constructive interpretation of the role of the Administrative Court." Thesis, University College London (University of London), 2015. http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1465970/.
Full textAbstract:
In this thesis I construct an interpretation of judicial review in England and Wales from the ground up based on an analysis of social practice in the Administrative Court. I argue that whilst judicial review provides a forum for debates about constitutional values and rights, and the inter-institutional balance of power between different branches of state, it is still primarily concerned with doing justice for individuals in relatively non-complex cases. Both in highly contested and technical claims with broader implications, and in cases turning largely on their own facts, justice is done by way of ordinary common law reasoning and specifically by assessing whether the initial decision-maker has taken relevant considerations (including moral considerations) into account, and excluded irrelevant considerations. My first central argument is that some existing interpretations of judicial review display a lack of appreciation of the social facts of litigation and legal practice, whilst others are based on significant misconceptions about these facts. My second central argument is against the scholarly tendency to overemphasise the production and refinement of conceptual doctrinal tests at the expense of addressing the contested nature of the moral values at stake in the practice of judicial review as a whole and in individual cases. My third central argument is for my own interpretation which both fits with and morally justifies social practice. On this interpretation judicial review is about individual justice, as opposed to jurisdiction (ultra vires) or justification. I conclude that my unorthodox categorisation of the grounds of review, constructivist approach to judicial reasoning (based in part on institutional creativity), and deeper examination of relevant social facts, could form the prologue to a post culture of justification account of judicial review.
29
Kohn, Lauren Manon. "The burgeoning constitutional requirement of rationality and separation of powers has rationality review gone too far?" Master's thesis, University of Cape Town, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4710.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis presents an analysis of three recent judgments of our apex courts which collectively illustrate a maximising of the 'minimum threshold requirement' of rationality through the seemingly inexhaustible constitutional principle of legality. The question sought to be addressed is whether, in extending this baseline requirement to cover procedural fairness, reason-giving and something akin to proportionality, in the context of non-administrative action and in the absence of any meaningful engagement with the doctrine of separation of powers, the courts are going too far.
30
Felix, John Anthony Shivaji. "Judicial review in administrative law : a comparative study of rights consciousness with special reference to Sri Lanka." Thesis, University of London, 2000. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.402139.
Full text
31
Ward, Ian Robert. "Misleading government information : an analysis of the legal remedies available to affected citizens." Thesis, University of British Columbia, 1985. http://hdl.handle.net/2429/24439.
Full textAbstract:
In the twentieth century, a dynamic expansion of its activities and powers has made government a major supplier of information on an enormous range of topics of concern to citizens. Unfortunately, the information which it provides is not always completely reliable: sometimes it is inaccurate, and government is powerless to protect the citizen from the consequences; at others, it proves misleading because government chooses later to disown it. The purpose of this thesis is to analyse the legal remedies available to citizens misled by government information.
The analysis has two principal areas of investigation. First, consideration is given to the means whereby the citizen may be able to hold government bound by information which it has provided to him. Separate treatment is given to the situations in which the misleading information deprives the citizen of a benefit or inflicts on him a loss, and in which it subjects him to the risk of criminal liability. Secondly, consideration is given to the possibility of holding government responsible in damages for the consequences of its information being misleading.
Of central importance in this wide-ranging analysis is the issue of the proper role of the courts. This stems from the fact that complaints about misleading government information frequently involve challenges to government decisions. Thus the majority of attempts by citizens to hold government bound by its information are generated by the making by government itself of a decision inconsistent with that information. Again, attempts to hold government responsible in damages for the consequences of providing misleading information commonly involve an allegation that a particular government decision relating to the provision of that information was negligent. It is emphasized throughout this thesis that the courts should refuse assistance to a citizen whose complaint of misleading government information is directed essentially towards a government decision, where that decision involves a determination of the priority of competing interests and values represented in society. The provision of a remedy in such a case would enable the courts effectively to review the choices embodied in value-laden government decisions, and as such would facilitate an unwarranted extension of their constitutional role.Law, Peter A. Allard School of
Graduate
32
Gerapetritis, George. "The application of proportionality in administrative law : judicial review in France, Greece, England and in the European Community." Thesis, University of Oxford, 1995. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.308666.
Full text
33
Henderson, A. "Restoring law and order : the impact of the new constitutional order on the judicial review of administrative action." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 1999. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.603954.
Full textAbstract:
The advent of the new constitutional order on the 27th of April 1994 has brought about a fundamental change in the law governing judicial review in South Africa. By guaranteeing everyone the right to just administrative action and providing for the enactment of legislation to give effect to this right the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996 has consolidated and introduced rules that govern the judicial review of administrative action: It has helped restore law. However it has also brought order to the judicial review of administrative action, which was in a state of chaos before the advent of the new constitutional order. This is the most important aspect of the impact of the new constitutional order on the judicial review of administrative action. The advent of constitutional supremacy means that judicial review is justified and explained ultimately by reference to the Constitution. For, the identification of specially entrenched principles such as 'the rule of law' and 'democratic government' helps to explain the relationship between the courts and Parliament with regard to the control of the executive. While the principle of the separation of the powers, identified implicitly in the Constitution, helps to explain the relationship between the courts and the executive and the limits of judicial review. Moreover, by providing the ultimate source for the exercise of every power that is subject to judicial review and helping to define the limits of those powers the Constitution helps to explain what is meant by 'administrative action'. Finally, by providing express directions for the interpretation of statutes and development of the common law the Constitution has ensured that every application for judicial review will be undertaken with reference to the same set of principles.
34
Nasser, Paulo Andre Vianna. "Controle da discricionariedade política à luz da Constituição: uma visão de sua legitimidade e legalidade no âmbito do Poder Judiciário." Niterói, 2017. https://app.uff.br/riuff/handle/1/4473.
Full textAbstract:
Submitted by Leoná Rodrigues (leonarodrigues@id.uff.br) on 2017-08-30T21:13:31Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
Controle da discricionariedade política - Paulo Nasser.pdf: 1066379 bytes, checksum: ed9630034155e46a8b44cc2bf573346e (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Biblioteca da Faculdade de Direito (bfd@ndc.uff.br) on 2017-09-12T14:54:37Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Controle da discricionariedade política - Paulo Nasser.pdf: 1066379 bytes, checksum: ed9630034155e46a8b44cc2bf573346e (MD5)
Made available in DSpace on 2017-09-12T14:54:37Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Controle da discricionariedade política - Paulo Nasser.pdf: 1066379 bytes, checksum: ed9630034155e46a8b44cc2bf573346e (MD5)
O presente trabalho intitulado controle da discricionariedade política à luz da constituição: uma visão de sua legitimidade e legalidade no âmbito do poder judiciário tem por objetivo analisar o tratamento dado pelo Poder Judiciário da discricionariedade política dos atos administrativos a ele submetidos. Para tanto se faz um comparativo entre Brasil e Espanha no tratamento dado pela doutrina e jurisprudência na definição do espectro de abrangência desse indeterminado conceito jurídico e os espaços de atuação de cada um dos poderes no exercício de suas competências constitucionais. Aponta-se para existência de dois grandes grupos de pensamento: os que advogam pela força do ato administrativo discricionário e os limites de legalidade e legitimidade impostos a sua sindicabilidade pelo Poder Judiciário e os que defendem a implementação judicial de políticas públicas como instrumento de viabilização e concretização dos direitos fundamentais resguardados pela Constituição do País. Os resultados apontaram para um desenvolvimento teórico atual muito complexo e elaborado para o tema e que ainda se está longe do fim desse debate. As conclusões do trabalho conduzem a uma reflexão sobre as mudanças estabelecidas ao longo do tempo na interpretação desse tema e sobre os desafios que ainda existem para a doutrina e jurisprudência na construção desses marcos teóricos.
The present work entitled control of the discretionary policy in the light of the constitution: a vision of its legitimacy and legality in the judiciary aims to analyze the treatment by the judiciary of political discretion of the administrative acts submitted to it. For that we make a comparison between Brazil and Spain in the treatment of the doctrine and jurisprudence in defining the scope of this spectrum of indeterminate legal concept and performance spaces for each of the powers in the exercise of its constitutional duties. They point to the existence of two major groups of thought: those who advocate the power of an administrative discretion and the limits of legality and legitimacy attributed to their control by the judiciary and those who advocate the implementation of judicial policies as a means of enabling and realization of fundamental rights protected by the Constitution of the Country results showed a very complex theoretical development today and prepared for the subject and that is still far from the end of this debate. The conclusion leads to a reflection on the changes over time established in the interpretation of this theme and the challenges that still exist for the doctrine and jurisprudence in the construction of theoretical frameworks.
35
Lin, Ching-Lang. "Arbitration in administrative contracts : comparative law perspective." Thesis, Paris, Institut d'études politiques, 2014. http://www.theses.fr/2014IEPP0023/document.
Full textAbstract:
Il a été longuement discuté de savoir si le système d'arbitrage est applicable pour régler les litiges administratifs qui concernent certains contrats administratifs ou d’autres sans rapport avec le contrat administratif. Dans cette thèse, les trois questions spécifiques sont analysées tour à tour : (1) Est-il possible pour un arbitre ou un tribunal arbitral de trancher des questions relevant du droit administratif? (2) Y a-t-il, ou devrait-il y avoir, des limitations à l'autorité des arbitres et des tribunaux arbitraux? (3) Enfin, après la délivrance d'une sentence arbitrale, quel rôle devrait jouer l'État dans la phase de contrôle judiciaire? La première question concerne l'arbitrabilité et a été discutée dans la première partie (FIRST PART: ARBITRABILITY). La deuxième question a été discutée dans la deuxième partie (SECOND PART: PARTICULAR QUESTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS IN ARBITRATION PROCEDURE). Enfin, sur la dernière question a fait l’objet d’une troisième partie (THIRD PART: JUDICIAL REVIEW AND EXECUTION OF ARBITRATION AWARD). Dans cette thèse, nous avons comparé les systèmes de quatre pays (Canada, Chine, France, Taïwan). En conclusion, nous pouvons donc conclure que l’évolution de la conception du contrat administratif implique de nombreux aspects, y compris les aspects juridiques, économiques, politiques et même culturels. Le développement de la fonction de contentieux administratif, comme ‘’subjectivement orienté" ou "objectivement orienté" aura une incidence sur l'acceptation de l'arbitrage en matière administrative. Dans l'ensemble, l'arbitrage sera plus acceptable dans les systèmes dont la fonction est plus ‘’subjectivement orientée" que dans ceux dont la fonction est "objectivement orientée"While arbitration has traditionally been considered as a means to resolve private disputes, its role in disputes involving administrative contracts is a crucial question in administrative law. In brief, the three specific questions are (1) Can arbitrators or arbitral tribunals decide issues involving administrative law? and (2) Is there, or should there be, any limitation on the authority of arbitrators or arbitral tribunals? (3) Moreover, after the issue of an arbitration award, what role should the State play in the judicial review phase? The first question, the issue of arbitrability, is discussed in part 1 (FIRST PART: ARBITRABILITY). The second question will be discussed in part2 (SECOND PART: PARTICULAR QUESTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS IN ARBITRATION PROCEDURE). Finally, on the question of what happens after the arbitration award, we will discuss judicial review in part 3 (THIRD PART: JUDICIAL REVIEW AND EXECUTION OF ARBITRATION AWARD). We compare legal systems between the four countries: in France, in Canada, in China and in Taiwan. We believe that an administrative contract, at least in its function and conception, is gradually becoming different from a private contract. Innovation with respect to administrative contracts will also reflect the concentration and function of the administrative litigation systems in each country. In addition, the “objective” or “subjective” function of administrative litigation will also affect the degree of arbitrability, as well as arbitration procedures. Taken together, arbitration will be more acceptable in systems whose function is more “subjectively oriented” than in those whose function is “objectively oriented". Finally, “the arbitration of administrative matters” traditionally has been an important question in administrative and arbitration law. In the future, we will continue to see it shine in the doctrine and jurisprudence of both the administrative and arbitration law fields
36
Lam, Kwong-chiu Gareth, and 林光潮. "A review of studies on cross Pearl River Delta Bridge." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 2004. http://hub.hku.hk/bib/B29959627.
Full text
37
Künnecke, Martina. "Towards similar standards of judicial protection against administrative action in England and Germany? : a comparison of judicial review of administrative action and the liability of public authorities under the influence of European laws." Thesis, University of Hull, 2002. http://hydra.hull.ac.uk/resources/hull:8314.
Full textAbstract:
This comparison has shown that the traditionally divergent positions, which are taken in the control of administrative action in England and Germany, display some common ground in very general terms on which decisions are being taken. The formulation of these general observations is valuable in the preparation of a transnational approximation of judicial review mechanism for the establishment of comparable levels of judicial protection in Europe. These results may be useful for future developments of a common system of judicial review across Europe, even though these results may only represent two pieces in the jigsaw. The comparison has also identified major differences and assessed the reasons for the diverging developments in a historical perspective. The identification of these differences is equally important because of the need to find compromises between divergent systems. Secondly, the thesis was concerned with an analysis of the degree of Europeanisation of the national judicial review systems and the concept of public liability as it is currently emerging. Here, some changes can be noted in both legal systems, which have led to a slow convergence of the systems. The changes in England are marked by an increasing openness for more transparency in the decision-making and the development of a more rights based culture. The substantive review of administrative decision through the application of sharper tools such as proportionality and substantive legitimate expectation mark a new era. Germany, on the other hand displays very high standards of review. The changes in Germany which were provoked mainly by case law of the European Court of Justice indicate the need to reduce the standard of review in some areas, such as the protection of substantive legitimate expectation in the context of the recovery of, state aid. The neglect of procedural protection which is illustrated by generous provisions which allow the in-trial curing of procedural effects displays an approach in Germany which is very focused on the substantive correctness of decisions. This attitude might, in the future lead to controversies in the context of European laws. Nevertheless, limitations to a convergence are inherently set by each national systems constitutional framework. The reasons for the different developments of both legal systems in the nineteenth and early twentieth century can not be ignored and will remain to an extent to preserve the national character of both systems. The variety of results, which have been identified in the four main chapters of this thesis were concerned with issues dealing with the institutional aspects as well as systematic aspects of judicial review and public liability in England and Germany. However, the nature of this comparison required the analysis of institutional contexts as well of the substantive and procedural judicial review mechanisms. The questions asked were concerned with identification of common principles and differences in a historical context, the degree of Europeanisation, which has led to an approximation of nationally divergent positions and the limitations, which are provided by each system's constitutional framework in which judicial review operates. The comparison focused on the development of a system of judicial review of administrative action in a historical perspective, the judicial control of the exercise of discretionary powers, fair procedures and their judicial review and the liability of public authorities in tort.
38
Bacon, Rachel. "Amalgamating tribunals a recipe for optimal reform /." University of Sydney. Law, 2004. http://hdl.handle.net/2123/621.
Full textAbstract:
The last decade has seen numerous proposals to reform existing tribunal systems in jurisdictions throughout the common law world. Across the board, there have been proposals to adopt generalist tribunal models in preference to smaller, specialist tribunal systems, and to achieve these changes through the process of amalgamation. The most significant recent developments to occur in Australia have taken place in Victoria and NSW during the past five years. Legislators in these States have chosen to amalgamate a number of smaller, specialist tribunals into larger, generalist bodies. In 1997 the NSW Parliament passed legislation amalgamating a number of specialist tribunals to create the Administrative Decisions Tribunal (ADT); comparable legislation was passed in Victoria in 1998 to create the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). There were concurrent attempts to implement similar reforms at federal level. In 1998 the Commonwealth government announced its intention to amalgamate four Commonwealth merits review tribunals to form one �super Tribunal� � the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART). The Bills containing these proposals were ultimately defeated in the Senate, however the Australian Government remains convinced of the benefits of amalgamation at federal level. Similar reforms have been proposed in Western Australia, Tasmania and the United Kingdom. This thesis argues that these reforms are taking place in the absence of data about their likely implications, and without a thorough understanding of the objectives that generalist versus specialist tribunal systems can realistically achieve. This ill-considered or �over-hasty� trend towards amalgamation raises a number of questions which have not previously been addressed in academic or policy-making circles. An obvious question is whether or not an amalgamated tribunal model is more effective than a series of smaller, specialised tribunals in delivering administrative justice, in other words, whether there is any net gain to be had from a government�s decision to amalgamate. The less explored, but equally important, question addressed in this thesis is how the process of amalgamation should be approached in order to realise the maximum potential benefits that an amalgamated tribunal can bring. That is, to ask what are the ingredients of an optimal amalgamation. This is not a question about whether government decisions to pursue amalgamation are intrinsically worthwhile or beneficial for stakeholders. Rather, it is about how government decisions to amalgamate should best be implemented. This thesis proposes a way of differentiating between good and bad amalgamations, that is grounded in theory and informed by experience to date. The proposed approach is to assess the effectiveness of amalgamation processes using relevant measures drawn from an analysis of organisational theory literature: � Legislation � the legislation establishing an amalgamated tribunal needs to ensure the tribunal will have appropriate independence, powers, processes, membership and structure. � Political commitment � those responsible for proposing and planning an amalgamation need to provide appropriate funding and support for the process and for the establishment of an autonomous, self-directed tribunal. � Organisational structure � the structures put in place need to be appropriate, integrated and flexible, and should promote cohesion and interaction. � Process and procedure � the processes and procedures adopted in an amalgamated tribunal need to capitalise upon the opportunities provided by amalgamation, as well as being appropriate, efficient and able to balance the needs of a range of stakeholders. � Organisational culture � an organisational culture which counters natural tendencies towards disjunction will assist members and staff to identify with a newly amalgamated tribunal and to implement initiatives that will improve its performance. � Leadership � effective leadership plays an important role in ensuring a smooth transition from specialist to amalgamated tribunal, and engendering commitment from members and staff. Broadly speaking, these factors fall into the four categories of law, context, organisation and people. It is argued that attention must be paid to all four of these ingredients in order to achieve optimal tribunal reform. The thesis tests this proposition by examining the three most advanced tribunal amalgamations so far, namely, the Commonwealth ART, the NSW ADT and VCAT in Victoria. It is argued that the fate of the Commonwealth ART proposal proves the importance of a solid, generally endorsed legislative foundation in creating a viable amalgamated tribunal. The importance of context, organisation and people is borne out by qualitative research into the amalgamation experiences in NSW and Victoria. The fact that the NSW and Victorian governments decided to pursue policies of amalgamation at the same time provided a unique opportunity to compare the success or otherwise of two concurrent attempts at amalgamation in different jurisdictions. This thesis finds that the unfavourable political context in NSW prevented the ADT from realising its potential. In contrast, the VCAT experience highlights the benefits of paying careful attention to the wide range of factors that can contribute to a successful amalgamation. Of most relevance are the initial scale of an amalgamation, the political �will� behind its implementation, the appointment of a core of full-time members, and the creation of an open institutional culture which facilitates the sharing of information. In short, the thesis concludes that the successful construction and consolidation of a tribunal post-amalgamation requires that the necessary ingredients of optimal tribunal reform � legislation, context, organisation and people � are thoughtfully addressed.
39
Thomas, Jerry D. "LAW AND IDEOLOGY IN THE U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS JUDICIAL REVIEW OF FEDERAL AGENCY DECISIONS." UKnowledge, 2010. http://uknowledge.uky.edu/gradschool_diss/115.
Full textAbstract:
The attitudinal model of judicial behavior dominates judicial politics scholarship, including studies of federal courts and agencies. Extant research finds limited support for legal constraints as determinants of judge behavior when agency decisions are under review. Attitudinal scholars suggest judges substitute their policy preferences in place of agency preferences. Contrarily, the legal model suggests judges defer to agencies because of procedures and doctrine rooted in the rule of law.
This study tests hypotheses predicting whether federal agency review decisions in the U.S. Courts of Appeals during 1982-2002 are a function of judges‘ attitudes, namely ideology, or a function of legal constraints, including agency adherence to legally prescribed procedures and agency passing standard-of-review muster. Using logistic regression, I examine the impact of legal and ideological variables on the outcome of judges‘ reviews of agency decisions.
Results support several hypotheses. Agency adherence to procedural standards, such as those outlined in the Administrative Procedures Act, increases the likelihood that a review panel will defer to the agency. If review panels and judges answer standard-of-review questions favorably toward agencies, review panels and judges are more likely to support agencies in final case outcomes. Individual judge votes to support agencies are influenced by the ideology of other judges on the review panel: if the ideology of the review panel is in agreement with the agency position, individual judges are more likely to support agencies in final case outcomes. Finally, a judge is more likely to dissent when he/she is in ideological (dis)agreement with the agency position.
In sum, results suggest that judges‘ regard for law and regard for their judge colleagues informs decisionmaking. Judges often defer to federal administrative agencies, even when their personal policy preferences are not found to be significantly associated with decisions. Judges‘ ideological preferences appear to be less important in the U.S. Courts of Appeals than previous scholarship indicates, but ideology may influence judges‘ decisions through the ideological composition of the review panel and in dissent behavior. The implication is that the legal model of judicial behavior may be more prominent than the attitudinal model in the U.S. Courts of Appeals.
40
Hanf, Christian. "Rechtsschutz gegen Inhalts- und Nebenbestimmungen zu Verwaltungsakten /." Frankfurt am Main [u.a.] : Lang, 2003. http://www.gbv.de/dms/spk/sbb/recht/toc/371109213.pdf.
Full text
41
劉丹. "抽象行政行為司法審查理論研究 : 完善我國抽象行政行為司法審查制度 = Theoretical research on the judicial review of abstract administrative act : improve the judicial review system of abstract administrative act in China." Thesis, University of Macau, 2010. http://umaclib3.umac.mo/record=b2179143.
Full text
42
Sanchez, Yoan. "Le rôle des juges dans le contrôle de l'activité administrative. Etude comparée du recours pour excès de pouvoir et de la judicial review." Thesis, Orléans, 2017. http://www.theses.fr/2017ORLE0001/document.
Full textAbstract:
L'existence de mécanismes efficaces de contrôle de l'activité administrative est une problématique commune aux pays européens. Le contrôle des juges y apparaît fondamental. Il est un gage de la soumission de l'administration au droit, via le respect du principe de légalité. Le rôle qu'ils jouent ne selimite toutefois pas à cette simple fonction. C'est ce que tend à démontrer une étude comparée globale du recours pour excès de pouvoir français et la judicial review anglaise. Alors que chacun de ces deux mécanismes apparaît comme une forme limitée de contrôle de la légalité, ils ont en réalité une portée plus étendue. Sous l'effet du développement des contraintes pesant sur l'action administrative, conséquence de l'enrichissement normatif des ordres juridiques, le rôle des juges s'accroît. La place qu'ils occupent au sein des institutions nationales doit être clairement définie, afin d'en assurer la légitimité.N'étant plus uniquement les garants de la volonté d'un Parlement de plus en plus contraint, les juges voient les fondements de leur rôle être renouvelés. La liberté dont ils disposent va croissante. Ce mouvement révèle leur double figure : tantôt acteurs du contrôle de légalité, et principal outil de soumission de l'administration à un droit en constant développement, ils sont également un moteur de ce mouvement. Cela leur permet d'en fixer les limites afin de ne pas scléroser l'activité administrative, elle aussi porteuse d'une légitimité propre. L'étude comparée du recours pour excès de pouvoir et de la judicial review permet la mise en lumière de cette dualité : les juges en définissent les différentes facettes et participent ainsi activement à la définition de leur propre rôleThe existence of efficient mechanisms of control for administrative activity is a common problem in European countries. Judicial control is of primary importance. It is a guarentee of the respect of law by public authorities, through the principle of legality. But, the role of judges is not only defined by this function. This can be demonstrated by a global comparison of the French recours pour excès de pouvoir and the English judicial review. While both mechanisms seem to allow a limited control of legality, the picture is not as simple. Because of the development of the strains on administrative action, due to the normative enrichment of legal orders, the role of the judiciary is extending. The position of judges within national institutions has to be clearly defined, in order to guarantee their legitimacy.As they can no longer be described as protectors of the will of Parliament, the foundations of their role is reassessed. Their discretionary power is increasing. It reveals their dualiaty: they are active in the control of legality, and as such they are the main instrument of the submission of public authorities to a developing legality, and they are also actors of this movment. As such, they draw limits in order not to ossify administrative activity, which is also legitimate. The comparision between the recours pour excès de pouvoir and judicial review can reveal this duality : the judges define its various aspects and actively participate to the definition of their own role
43
Madebwe, Tinashe Masvimbo. "Assessing the duty to exhaust internal remedies in the South African law." Thesis, Rhodes University, 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1007253.
Full textAbstract:
Since the incorporation of the separation of powers doctrine into the South African Constitution, the problem has arisen that, each of the three tiers of government, the Executive, the Judiciary and the Legislature, has sought to protect exclusive jurisdiction over matters that fall within what constitutes that tier's own realm of authority. The effects of this are especially apparent in the field of dispute resolution in administrative law. The administration is predominantly the province of the Executive, and to a lesser extent, the Legislature. Thus, the acceptability of judicial review in dispute resolution and generally, the intrusion by the Judiciary in matters of the administration is perennially questioned and challenged by both the Executive and the Legislature. In this context, the duty to exhaust internal remedies assumes a pivotal role. It offers a compromise, by prescribing qualified exclusion of judicial review as a first port of call for dispute resolution while simultaneously entrusting initial dispute resolution to the administration. Often, this approach yields tangible results, but from a constitutional and fundamental rights perspective, the duty to exhaust internal remedies is problematic. Its exclusion of judicial review goes against, not only the right of access to court in section 34 of the Constitution, but also the rule of law, to the extent that the rule of law allows for the challenging, in court, of illegal administrative action as soon as it is taken. This thesis analyses the constitutionality of the duty to exhaust internal remedies in section 7(2) of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act by assessing the consistency of section 7(2) of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act with the right of access to court in section 34 of the Constitution. The thesis initially examines the origins and historical development of the duty to exhaust internal remedies in the English law, and the subsequent adoption of the duty to exhaust internal remedies into the South African common law for the purpose of interpreting and comprehending the duty to exhaust internal remedies as it is appears in section 7(2) of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act. Ultimately, the study focuses on and identifies the deficiencies in the current approach to the question of the constitutionality of section 7(2) of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, and offers suggestions on how the law might be developed.
44
Angiolucci, Maria de Lurdes Aparecida Trujillo. "O controle judicial dos atos administrativos discricionários e a jurisprudência." Universidade de São Paulo, 2014. http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/2/2134/tde-21082017-153306/.
Full textAbstract:
O presente trabalho de pesquisa tem por objetivo analisar algumas das inúmeras decisões do Supremo Tribunal Federal e do Superior Tribunal de Justiça, bem como do Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo, em matéria de controle jurisdicional dos atos administrativos discricionários e verificar se é possível identificar mudança substancial nos limites desse controle. O trabalho foi dividido em duas partes, sendo a primeira constituída por uma pesquisa bibliográfica destinada, essencialmente, a situar o tema da discricionariedade administrativa, num enfoque conceitual e histórico. A segunda parte refere-se à pesquisa sobre o tema na jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal, Superior Tribunal de Justiça, Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo e, ainda, no acórdão relativo à apelação cível nº. 1.422 do Tribunal de Justiça do Rio Grande do Norte, cuja relatoria ficou a cargo de Miguel Seabra Fagundes. Os atos administrativos discricionários, por muito tempo foram considerados insindicáveis pelo Poder Judiciário, ou seja, imunes à apreciação jurisdicional. Contudo, é possível identificar o surgimento de alguns parâmetros jurídicos que objetivaram restringir a atividade administrativa discricionária, inserindo-a, sob determinados aspectos, no âmbito da apreciação jurisdicional. O balizamento inicial restringiu-se à lei, permanecendo o mérito do ato administrativo intocado. Nesse processo de tentativa de contenção dos atos administrativos discricionários desenvolveram-se teorias de controle, como a teoria do desvio de poder e a teoria dos motivos determinantes. Cite-se, também, a teoria dos conceitos jurídicos indeterminados e, mais recentemente, a teoria da vinculação dos atos administrativos aos princípios constitucionais. O mérito do ato administrativo é o espaço que ainda suscita algumas controvérsias. A pesquisa jurisprudencial foi realizada, em sua maioria, diretamente nos sítios do Tribunal respectivo. Nota-se, ao analisar a jurisprudência, que há uma tendência no STF e no STJ em acolher a tese de uma apreciação mais ampla pelo Poder Judiciário, como foi o caso do Resp 429570/GO, cuja relatoria ficou a cargo da Ministra Eliana Calmon; se bem que é ainda, bastante comum, os acórdãos explicitarem que não cabe apreciação pelo judiciário sob o aspecto da conveniência e oportunidade do ato administrativo, ou seja, do mérito do ato.This research aims to examine some of the numerous decisions of the Supremo Tribunal Federal and Superior Tribunal de Justiça, as well as the Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo, regarding judicial control of discretionary administrative acts and verify that is possible to identify substantial change in the limits of this control. The work was divided into two parts, the first consisting of a literature research aimed essentially to place the issue of administrative discretion, in a conceptual and historical focus. The second part refers to research on the topic in the jurisprudence of the Supremo Tribunal Federal, Superior Tribunal de Justiça, Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo and also in the judgment on the civil appeal nº. 1422 of the Tribunal de Justiça do Rio Grande do Norte, whose rapporteur was entrusted to Miguel Seabra Fagundes. Discretionary administrative acts were long disregarded by the judiciary, in other words immune to judicial review. However, it is possible to identify the rise of some legal parameters that aimed to restrict the discretionary administrative activity by inserting it, in certain respects, within the scope of judicial review. The initial marking was restricted to the law, remaining the substance of the administrative act untouched. In this process to attempt to contain discretionary administrative acts were developed theories of control, as the deviation of power and the theory of determinants reasons. Is mentioned, too, the theory of indeterminate legal concepts and, more recently, the theory of binding administrative acts to constitutional principles. The merit of the administrative act is the space that still shows some controversies. The jurisprudential research was conducted, for the most part, directly on the websites of the respective Court. It is noted, when considering the case law, that there is a trend in the STF and STJ to welcome the idea of a wider appreciation by the judiciary, like was the case Resp 429570/GO, whose rapporteur was in the responsibility of the Minister Eliana Calmon, although it is still quite common, the judgments stating that it is not for consideration by the judiciary under the aspect of convenience and opportunity of the administrative act, in other words, the act of merit.
45
Hosseini, Sadrabadi Iraj. "L'influence du modèle français de contrôle de la légalité des actes administratifs : le cas de l'Iran." Thesis, Aix-Marseille, 2013. http://www.theses.fr/2013AIXM1055.
Full textAbstract:
S'inspirant du modèle français, le législateur iranien a créé en 1960 une nouvelle institution : le Conseil d'État iranien. Mais la loi n'a jamais été appliquée. La Cour de Justice Administrative (CJA) actuelle a été créé par l'article 173 de la Constitution de 1979, pour exercer le contrôle judiciaire sur les organismes et les agents de l'autorité publique, sous l'autorité du pouvoir judiciaire. La CJA est compétente pour les recours en excès de pouvoir contre les actes administratifs et contre les fonctionnaires publics. Le contentieux de la légalité des actes administratifs en droit iranien distingue les recours objectifs envisagés à l'article 19 de la loi de 2006 relative à la CJA et les recours subjectifs prévus à l'article 13 de cette loi. L'Assemblée générale de la CJA est compétente pour les recours objectifs et les Chambre de cette Cour pour les recours subjectifs. Ce qui caractérise la CJA, c'est qu'elle soit principalement le juge de première et de dernière instance. En matière de décisions définitives des juridictions spécialisées, elle agit en tant que juge de cassation. Elle est le juge du droit commun des litiges administratifs car dans le système iranien, il n'existe ni des tribunaux administratifs ni des cours administratives d'appelInspired by the French model, the Iranian legislator created in 1960 a new institution: The Council of State of Iran. But the law has never been implemented. The Court of Administrative Justice (CAJ) of that time was created by the section 173 of the 1979 Constitution to exercise judicial control over agencies and the agents of public authority under the authority of the judiciary. The CAJ is responsible for the excessive use of power against administrative acts and against agents' administration. The dispute on the legality of administrative acts in Iranian law distinguishes between the objective appeals envisaged in article 19 of the 2006 Act on the CAJ and the subjective appeals provided in article 13 of this law. The General Assembly of the CAJ is responsible for the objective appeals and The Chamber of this Court is responsible for the subjective appeals. What characterizes the CAJ is that it is primarily the judge of the first and the last instance. In terms of final decisions of the specialized courts, it acts as a court of cassation. It is the judge of the common administrative law cases as in the Iranian system; then there are no administrative courts or administrative courts of appeal
46
Cabral, Thales Francisco Amaral. "Controle de constitucionalidade no processo administrativo: corolário do devido processo legal." Universidade Federal de Alagoas, 2015. http://www.repositorio.ufal.br/handle/riufal/1246.
Full textAbstract:
The dissertation analyses the judicial review of legislation in Public Administration, questioning the possibility of such competence in the course of administrative process on the basis of the due process clause. After studying the logical-legal aspects of the constitutionality of legislation phenomenon, the constitutionality control instruments in the Brazilian legal system is examined. A broad definition process that could include administrative processuality is adopted. It is argued that the clause of due process functions as procedural validity requirement, limiting thus the content of the decisions and the form to decide. In the last chapter, the hypothesis of due process, the procedural validity requirement condition, support the constitutionality control laws in the administrative process is verified.A dissertação analisa o controle de constitucionalidade das leis no âmbito da Administração Pública, problematizando o cabimento de tal competência sindicante no curso dos processos administrativos com fundamento na cláusula do devido processo legal. Após o estudo dos aspectos lógico-jurídico do fenômeno da inconstitucionalidade das leis, examinam-se os instrumentos de controle de constitucionalidade no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro. Apresenta-se, em seguida, uma definição ampla de processo, capaz de abarcar a processualidade administrativa. Defende-se que a cláusula do devido processo legal funciona como requisito de validade processual, limitando, dessa forma, o conteúdo das decisões e a forma de decidir. No último capítulo, a hipótese de o devido processo legal, na condição de requisito de validade processual, amparar o controle de constitucionalidade as leis no processo administrativo é, enfim, verificada.
47
Fairclough, Thomas. "The Human Rights Act 1998 in constitutional context : the common law, the rule of law, and human rights." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2019. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/285494.
Full textAbstract:
The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) is seen as a landmark piece of constitutional legislation that brought about many legal and political changes in the United Kingdom's human rights architecture. Yet the HRA is vulnerable to repeal; successive governments have promised to repeal or otherwise alter the HRA. In this climate, the Supreme Court has instructed counsel to argue common law rights first, with the HRA there to supplement and fill the gap on the occasions where the common law does not go as far as the HRA. The logical conclusion of this is that the Supreme Court, or at least some Justices, think that the common law adequately protects rights to a level near, if not the same as, the HRA does; the results of arguing the common law will often be the same as those resulting from reliance on the HRA. The academic commentary regarding these judicial statements has been far from enthusiastic. The consensus is that common law rights do not go as far as the HRA in terms of their width, that the enforcement mechanisms lack rigour compared to s 3 HRA and the proportionality principle, and that they are vulnerable to legislative override. Therefore, a loss of the HRA would be a loss for the legal protection of rights. This thesis disputes the conclusion stated in the foregoing paragraph. It argues that one has to view the vectors against which one can measure the potency of common law rights through the lens of the rule of law. This principle, the controlling factor in the constitution, promises protection against arbitrary behaviour by state actors because it embodies the value of equality of concern. Once this is appreciated, an entirely new dimension of common law rights becomes apparent; the reach of rights, their rigour of protection, and their constitutional resilience are revealed to be much stronger than orthodoxy suggests.
48
Costa, Angelo Augusto. "Devido processo legal e redução da discricionariedade administrativa." Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, 2008. https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/8082.
Full textAbstract:
Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:27:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
Angelo Augusto Costa.pdf: 2058806 bytes, checksum: 2de38ac3bf800d2685f0bcb29a8f6c55 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2008-05-15The main goal of this work is to explore normative connections between the due process clause, as stated in the Brazilian Constitution (CF 5º, LIV), and the reduction of administrative discretion when it comes to deciding particular cases. The relevance of the subject lies on the need of defining criteria for judicial review of discretionary administrative action, in order to secure and preserve both administrative decision-making and judicial reviewing powers. The working hypothesis is that due process of law provides a sound normative basis for a rule forbidding arbitrary display of powers in Brazilian law. This is so because due process clause requires in decision-making a kind of cognitive, volitive and argumentative process with the basic attribute of rationality. Thus all the limits imposed by the law on administrative discretion could be placed under the due process clause. Furthermore, due process could be viewed as grounds for a systematic exposition of vicious discretionary actions, including not giving reasons for action and poor correlation of fact-findings and legal norms. Robert Alexy's theory of legal principles was adopted as a landmark. Brazilian and foreign production on administrative discretion was taken into account as well, in an attempt to overcome the loopholes of legal positivism's description of how the law is applied. Whenever it was possible, we managed to use case study methods to uncover legal argumentation structures and the way fact-findings and legal norms correlate. As a result, we built a system of vicious discrectionary actions
O objetivo do trabalho é o de explorar as conexões normativas entre a cláusula do devido processo legal (CF 5º, LIV) e o fenôneno da redução da discricionariedade administrativa nos casos concretos. A importância do tema reside na necessidade de definir critérios sistemáticos para o exercício do controle jurisdicional dos limites da discricionariedade a fim de preservar as competências decisórias da Administração Pública e, ao mesmo tempo, assegurar a plenitude da revisão judicial. A hipótese geral é a de que o devido processo legal proporciona o fundamento normativo da proibição da arbitrariedade no direito brasileiro por exigir a adoção de um processo de cognição, volição e argumentação com o atributo fundamental da racionalidade. Desse modo, todos os limites à discricionariedade administrativa, cuja violação resulta em arbitrariedade proibida, podem ser reconduzidos à cláusula do devido processo. Além disso, o devido processo legal serve de base para a construção de um sistema dos vícios do exercício da discricionariedade administrativa, em especial dos vícios de ausência de motivação e de relacionamento defeituoso entre os elementos fáticos e normativos relevantes. Adotou-se, como referência, a teoria dos princípios de Robert Alexy, assim como a produção nacional e estrangeira sobre discricionariedade administrativa, no marco das tentativas de superação das lacunas do positivismo jurídico na descrição do processo de aplicação do direito. Empregou-se, sempre que possível, a metodologia de estudo de casos para revelar as estruturas de argumentação jurídica e o modo como se relacionam os elementos fáticos e normativos. O resultado foi a construção de um sistema de vícios do exercício da discricionariedade administrativa
49
Jin, Xin. "L'application de l'accord antidumping aux États-Unis, dans l'Union européenne et en Chine : une étude critique sous l'angle du protectionnisme." Thesis, Aix-Marseille, 2017. http://www.theses.fr/2017AIXM0010.
Full textAbstract:
Il existe deux grands types de politiques dans le commerce international, le protectionnisme et le libre échange. Le libre échange est généralement accepté sur le plan international, mais cela ne signifie pas que le protectionnisme est totalement rejeté par les pays. En revanche, il est effectué sous les formes plus ou moins couvertes, et il serait plus difficile d’identifier les biais protectionnistes parmi les mesures prises sous le prétexte légitime. Le droit antidumping est un domaine qui suscite toujours des débats relatifs au protectionnisme entre les pays. En raison des intérêts nationaux, il est rare de voir les pays ouvrir complètement leur marché, c’est ainsi que l’OMC octroie aux États membres le pouvoir de limiter les importations de produits étrangers dans certains cas spéciaux. Les mesures antidumping sont un outil important qui protège le marché domestique, face au choc des importations étrangères visant à obtenir des bénéfices d’une manière injustifiée. En réalisant que les pays pourraient chercher à acquérir l’avantage dans la concurrence à travers ces mesures, l’OMC a voulu limiter l’imposition arbitraire de mesures antidumping. Cependant, il s’avère que l’Accord antidumping ne peut pas remplir parfaitement cette mission, et qu’il est impossible de garantir la mise en œuvre du droit antidumping dans un cadre sans protectionnisme. Ainsi, nous ne pouvons pas négliger la valeur du droit antidumping, car il est encore en mesure d’inciter les pays à promouvoir le libre échange, en leur concédant le droit de protéger leurs intérêts dans des circonstances spécifiquement définiesThere are two policies in the international commerce, the protectionism and the free trade. The free trade is accepted by the world, but it does not mean that the protectionism is wholly abandoned by the countries. On the contrary, it is applied in the forms which are difficult to detect, and it is hard to distinguish the protectionism among the antidumping actions with a legal pretext. The antidumping law provokes always the debate concerning the protectionism. Because of the national interest, the countries can not open the market completely, and WTO accords the power to the countries to limit the imports under the particular circumstances. The antidumping action could protect the national industries from the choc of the imports which get the benefits illegally. Although WTO wants to eliminate the arbitrary antidumping action, the antidumping agreement could not accomplish this mission, and it is impossible to exclude the protectionism thoroughly from the antidumping law. Nevertheless, we can not negate its value, because it can also urge the countries to promote the free trade at the cost of the allowance of la protection of the national interests to some degree
50
Pessanha, Luis. "Contributo para uma tutela jurisdicional cautelar efectiva no Contencioso Administrativo de Macau, por mares nunca antes navegados." Thesis, University of Macau, 2008. http://umaclib3.umac.mo/record=b1636997.
Full text