Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  administrative court control
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The object of the analysis is the administrative court control of “other acts or activities in the area of public administration as regards rights or responsibilities resulting from legal regulations” under art. 3 § 2 section 4 of the act – Law on proceedings before administrative courts. This study adopts the assumption about the existence of two types of complaints, and, as a consequence, two types of administrative court cases have been differentiated, as established by the legislator in art. 3 § 2 section 4. It has been assumed that it is justified to apply to them the interpretation directive according to which doubts occurring in the area of permissibility of filing complaints to the administrative court regarding a specific “other act” or “activity” under art. 3 § 2 section 4 of administrative court proceeding cannot be resolved to the detriment of the complainant. On the basis of the considerations presented, there are grounds for formulating postulates de lege ferenda: introduction of a statutory duty for the public administration bodies to give instructions about possibility of complaining against their actions under art. 3 § 2 section 4 of the administrative court proceedings and the related need to summon the body to eliminate the breach of the law and to observe statutory deadlines, determine a general rule for appropriate application of some principles and regulations of administrative court proceedings to “other acts” and to introduce the obligation to formulate substantive element of the court sentence under art. 146 § 2 of the administrative court proceedings by the court.
EN
The study presents the position of administrative courts relating to the issues of presidencial prerogative related to the appointment of judges. For years now, administrative courts have been consistent in not recognizing their competence to adjudicate in matters regarding President̀ s decisions concerning the appointment of judges. The arguments of the courts can be divided into several groups: 1) those connected with prerogatives and non-inclusion of the President among the organs of public administration, 2) those referring to the principle of the separation of powers, 3) those regarding the way the President̀ s decisions are classified. It is flagging out a certain new trend in the case-law of administrative courts, relating the classification of certain activities of President of Republic of Poland as activities of public administration in a functional sense.
PL
W opracowaniu przedstawione zostało stanowisko sądów administracyjnych odnoszące się do problematyki prezydenckiej prerogatywy związanej z powoływaniem sędziów. Sądy administracyjne konsekwentnie od lat nie uznają swojej właściwości do orzekania w sprawach związanych z postanowieniami Prezydenta dotyczącymi powołania do pełnienia urzędu na stanowisku sędziego. Argumenty sądów można podzielić na kilka grup: 1) związane z prerogatywą oraz brakiem zaliczenia Prezydenta do organów administracji publicznej, 2) odwołujące się do zasady trójpodziału władzy, 3) dotyczące sposobu zakwalifikowania postanowienia Prezydenta. Zasygnalizowana także została pewna nowa tendencja w orzecznictwie sądów administracyjnych dotycząca klasyfikacji pewnych czynności Prezydenta RP jako działalności administracji publicznej w znaczeniu funkcjonalnym.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.