Search results

1

Judicial Review – historia i współczesność

100%

Justyński J., Justyńska I.

Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne

|

2019

|

vol. 71

|

issue 2

PL

Judicial Review – sądowa kontrola konstytucyjności ustaw, kształtowała się na przestrzeni kilkuset lat, równolegle z formowaniem się podstawowych elementów współczesnych systemów politycznych. Jej pojawianie się poprzedziło ugruntowanie się koncepcji trójpodziału władz, suwerenności narodu (w miejsce suwerenności władzy królewskiej) oraz praw człowieka. Instytucje te oraz zasady ustrojowe wprowadzone zostały do Konstytucji amerykańskiej z 1787 r. , której struktura podkreśla fundamentalny charakter trójpodziału władz, jak również, przez wprowadzenie do niej w procesie ratyfikacji Konstytucji, pierwszych dziesięciu poprawek – praw i wolności obywatela amerykańskiego. Przez okres ponad stulecia debata polityczna, w tym także ustrojowa, Europy koncentrowała się nade wszystko nad problematyką suwerenności i praw, tym samym odsuwała na plan dalszy kontrolę konstytucyjności ustaw. Uważano bowiem, iż formowanie organu sprawującego kontrolę konstytucyjną nad aktami władzy ustawodawczej i decyzjami formowanej przez nią władzy wykonawczej, prowadzi do ustanowienia swoistej super izby wobec parlamentu będącego emanacją woli suwerena. Refleksje ustrojowe A. de Tocqueville'a, następnie rozważania i działania praktyczne H. Kelsena przybliżyły – stopniowo- instytucję sądowej kontroli konstytucyjności ustaw do realiów europejskich. Poważna debata polityczna nad tym zagadnieniem podjęta została w Polsce w latach osiemdziesiątych, a warunki do jej ustrojowej materializacji powstały dzięki regulacjom Konstytucji RP w 1997 r. Proces integracji europejskiej sprawił, iż polski system ustrojowy, w tym także funkcjonowanie Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, stało się częścią tworzonego przez Unię Europejską autonomicznego systemu prawnego.

2

Prawnomiędzynarodowy standard sądowej kontroli w sprawach związanych z zabezpieczeniem społecznym a regulacje polskie

85%

Gajewski S.

Opolskie Studia Administracyjno-Prawne

|

2019

|

vol. 17

|

issue 1

67-75

EN

The Convention of ILO № 102 is the basic source of international-law rules in the area of social security. This convention concerns the standards of judicial review in matters regarding social security. It declares that whenever a claim is settled by a special tribunal established to deal with social security questions and on which the protected persons are represented, no right of appeal should be required. It means that matters regarding social security should be settled by tribunals that are organizationally, personally and procedurally separated from those dealing with other cases. In Poland, most of the matters regarding social security are settled by common courts, by their special departments, in a special procedure. Nevertheless, relevant departments can also deal with cases concerning labor law and they do not consist of persons who are not judges and represent protected persons. It means that the Polish regulations concerning the judicial review in matters regarding social security do not fulfill the standard established by the Convention № 102.

3

Judicial review of arbitration proceedings in light of international practice

80%

Bareła M.

Studia Prawnicze

|

2013

|

issue 1 (193)

35-67

EN

As a general rule, every legal system in the world has regulations governing proceedings before a national court of law; some of the proceedings are possibly instituted subsequently to arbitration and thus review awards issued in arbitration proceedings. Such review may be carried out, first, where there is a motion to have the arbitral award set aside (deemed invalid, nullified) or where the arbitral award is to be recognized or enforced judicially. The general objective of the review is to secure legal transactions by eliminating decisions made in the conduct of arbitration proceedings, if their outcome may not be authorized by a state, mainly due to their disaccord with the basic principles of legal order. The scope of the review may vary as it is dependent upon internal regulations of a given state, especially whether the aforesaid regulations were set forth in compliance with the UNCITRAL Model Law, or whether the legal system provides for separate provisions on arbitral awards issued at a territory of a given country but within international arbitration proceedings, or finally whether the parties, at their discretion, may be precluded from applying to have an arbitral award set aside.

4

The role of parliamentary autonomy in constitutional review

80%

Wintr J., Chmel J., Askari D.

The Lawyer Quarterly

|

2021

|

vol. 11

|

issue 1

83-103

EN

The article deals with the principle of parliamentary autonomy and the role it plays in decisions of courts carrying out constitutional review. The principles and interests competing with parliamentary autonomy are categorized and analysed against the backdrop of relevant case-law, offering a wide scale of approaches used by courts around the world. Three groups of competing interests are analysed separately: (i) public control of parliaments, (ii) the principle of representation and (iii) the rights of parliamentary opposition and individual members of parliament. Within the analysis, examples of good practice as well as those of unpersuasive approaches are offered. Subsequently, the article offers general doctrinal principles, the observance of which would help ensure that courts do not overreach in regulating parliamentary internal affairs, thus triggering unwanted consequences.

5

Judicial Review of the Implementation of Development Policy – Ten Years of Practice

80%

Gilowska A.

Przegląd Prawa Administracyjnego

|

2019

|

vol. 2

EN

The article addresses the issue of judicial review of decisions in the area of development policy (that consist in not qualifying a specific project for funding) and an attempt is made to assess the functioning of this measure on the tenth anniversary of its introduction into the national system for implementing this policy. The analysis of legal acts, doctrine and case law in the field of development policy allows one to draw the conclusion that the act of implementing the policy, i.e. selection of a specific project for financing, is a sui generis operation of administration, not subject to the provisions of the Code of Administrative Procedure. The most important criterion for assessing this measure should be its effectiveness, understood as the highest degree of implementation of the objective assumed under development policy. Hence, the model of review adopted in Poland and applied by administrative courts, appointed to examine the legality of reviewed acts, does not meet the expectations. The article is an attempt to assess the adopted review model in terms of its impact on the effectiveness of the development policy system and the effectiveness of protection granted.

PL

W artykule podjęto temat sądowej kontroli rozstrzygnięć z zakresu polityki rozwoju (polegających na niezakwalifikowaniu konkretnego projektu do uzyskania dofinansowania) i dokonano próby oceny funkcjonowania tej instytucji w dziesiątą rocznicę jej wprowadzenia do krajowego systemu realizacji tej polityki. Analiza aktów prawnych, doktryny i orzecznictwa z zakresu polityki rozwoju prowadzi do wniosku, że akt realizacji polityki, jakim jest wyłonienie do dofinansowania konkretnego projektu, stanowi sui generis działanie administracji niepodlegające przepisom kodeksu postępowania administracyjnego. Najistotniejszym kryterium oceny tego działania powinna być jego efektywność, rozumiana jako najwyższy stopień realizacji celu założonego w ramach polityki rozwoju. Stąd też przyjęty w Polsce model kontroli dokonywanej przez sądy administracyjne, powołane do badania legalności kontrolowanych aktów, nie spełnia pokładanych w nim oczekiwań. Artykuł stanowi próbę oceny przyjętego modelu kontroli pod względem jej wpływu na efektywność systemu prowadzenia polityki rozwoju oraz na skuteczność udzielonej ochrony.

6

Institution of taxing discretion: between tax law and taxing arbitrariness

80%

Buława P.

Studia Administracyjne

|

2021

|

vol. 13

|

issue 1

5-15

EN

Taxing discretion disrupts the dichotomous nature of tax law provisions, especially if it concerns tax liabilities. This institution may even be considered arbitrary and deemed not applicable in the Czech Republic. An analysis of English and German law indicates that taxing discretion is inevitable but may be effectively limited, e.g. by introducing a legal doctrine stating that exercise of taxing discretion is bound by the purposes of an act of Parliament granting taxing discretion and by judicial review. In the Czech Republic, taxing discretion is limited by administrative guidelines and judicial review, but further improvements are advisable. This would allow to reintroduce tax cancellation based on taxing discretion into Czech law.

7

Sądowa kontrola konstytucyjności ustaw zmieniających konstytucję w Indiach

80%

Szwed M.

Przegląd Sejmowy

|

2016

|

issue 3(134)

63-78

EN

The article presents evolution of the case law of the Supreme Court of India on the judicial review of the constitutionality of constitutional amendments, its evaluation in the legal doctrine and perception outside India. Although the Constitution of India does not contain any limitations as to the substance of constitutional amendments, during the political crisis in the period of Indira Gandhi’s rule, the Supreme Court has developed an effective system of judicial review of constitutional amendments. It is based on the assumption that the competence of the Parliament to enact amendments to the Constitution is not unlimited, because the parliament cannot destroy the same act from which it derives its authority. It must therefore respect certain fundamental principles which form the so-called “basic structure of the Constitution”. Applying this doctrine, the Supreme Court overturned a number of amendments, including those violating principle of judicial independence. The evaluation of the Supreme Court’s case law is divergent: according to some legal scholars it helped to save Indian democracy, while according to others it is full of loopholes and gives unlimited power to the judges. Despite this, it has had a substantial impact on the jurisprudence of courts in other countries in the region or even in other parts of the World.

8

Putting Dawn Raids under Control

80%

Contreras Condezo J. G., Kingma A., Scholten M.

|

2020

|

vol. 13

|

issue 22

145-168

FR

« Dawn raids » sont devenus un moyen efficace de faire respecter le droit européen et national de la concurrence. Le contrôle judiciaire est un mécanisme essential de contrôle du pouvoir exécutif contre d’éventuels abus de ce pouvoir. Toutefois, ce contrôle judiciaire a montré ses limites ; il ne garantit pas toujours une reparation adéquate pour les parties concernées. Comment résoudre le problème du contrôle judiciaire limité pour assurer le contrôle des « dawn raids »? Cet article avance que les limites du contrôle juridictionnel pourraient être résolues en étendant les types de contrôle sur cette action, c’est-à-dire les orientations législatives ex ante et la responsabilité interne des administrateurs. Ainsi, la thèse plus conceptuelle de l’article est qu’il est essentiel de chercher des liens entre les différents concepts et types de contrôles pour garantir un système complet et efficace de contrôle des actions du pouvoir exécutif.

EN

Dawn raids have become an effective tool to enforce EU and national competition laws. Judicial review is an essential mechanism of control over the executive branch against possible misuse of this power. However, this judicial review has shown to have limits; it cannot always guarantee an adequate redress for the affected parties. How to address the limited judicial review to ensure control over dawn raids? This article argues that the limits of judicial review could be addressed by extending the types of controls over this action, i.e. ex ante legislative guidance and internal managerial accountability. The more conceptual argument that this paper puts forward is thus that it is essential to seek connections between different concepts and types of controls to ensure a comprehensive/water-tight system of controls over the actions of the executive branch.

9

What Can We Learn About Regulatory Agencies and Regulated Parties from the Empirical Study of Judicial Review of Regulatory Agencies’ Decisions? The Case of Croatia

70%

Bajakić I., Kos V.

Central European Journal of Public Policy

|

2016

|

vol. 10

|

issue 1

22-34

EN

The purpose of this paper is to examine regulatory agencies and regulated parties in an empirical study of administrative disputes initiated against the decisions of regulatory agencies in Croatia. We first aim to provide an overview of the status and trend estimates regarding these disputes; second, to answer the question how well does the system work from the perspectives of both the plaintiffs and the regulatory agencies; third, to identify the problem areas and to compare these with problem areas identified by the authors studying the broader area of administrative judiciary in Croatia, and finally to compare efficiency level of regulatory agencies to other public authorities in confirming the legality of their decisions and actions. Data on all administrative disputes against 12 Croatian regulatory agencies’ decisions in the 17-year period between 1995 and 2011 are used to identify the main characteristics and trends relating to these disputes. Data for 2012 to 2013 was also examined to identify initial changes and emerging trends in the new administrative judiciary system resulting from fundamental legal reform as part of Croatia’s process of accession to the European Union in 2013. The results show these administrative disputes to be often costly and timely with modest outcome for the plaintiff and impressive success rate for the most of regulatory agencies.

10

Separate, Equal, or Separate-But-Equal? The Changing Image of Race in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decisions

70%

Laidler P.

Politeja : Pismo Wydziału Studiów Miedzynarodowych i Politycznych Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego

|

2013

|

issue 1(23)

249-273

EN

There is no doubt that the United States were not created as a purely democratic state. On the one hand, it established basic rules and principles of democratic government such as free elections, sovereignty of the nation, fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals or independent judiciary. All of these principles were, however, enjoyed only by the part of American society: free elections were guaranteed for white men, excluding women and blacks; sovereignty belonged to the nation, i.e. white women and men, because slaves were not considered citizens; fundamental rights and freedoms were guaranteed only for whites; institutional independence of the judicial branch did not prevent the system from injustice towards the blacks. Furthermore, one of the most important values of democratic society, equal protection of law, was absent in the original constitutional document of 1787, as well as the provisions of Bill of Rights. The clause became part of U.S. constitutional reality yet in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted, as a direct result of social and political changes caused by the civil war. After introducing the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865, which abolished slavery, the government took a step forward by making all citizens equal in 1868 and by providing black Americans with suffrage rights in 1870. For former slaves it meant a milestone step in their fight to destroy the social and political boundaries which limited their basic rights and freedoms. However, before the above mentioned events took place, the period of injustice and exploitation occurred with the U.S. Supreme Court in the middle of social and political tensions. The main purpose of the article is to show the changing attitude of the U.S. Supreme Court with regard to the social and political status of African‑Americans. This attitude influenced historical and contemporary social relations among the American society proving one of the most controversial aspects of U.S. democracy.

11

U.S. Supreme Court in the civil rights era: Deliberative Democracy and its educative institutional role, 1950s–1970s

70%

Figueroa C.

Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym

|

2018

|

vol. 21

|

issue 4

59-88

EN

This article examines the U.S. Supreme Court’s lesser-known educative role as an egalitarian institution within a broader deliberative democratic process. Scholars have argued that the Court’s long asserted power of judicial review, especially in the equal protection and civil rights context, has been an over-reach of the judicial branch’s constitutional authority and responsibilities. Normative and empirical critiques have been centered on the aims of judicial review, and the challenges it poses in American political life. A core issue surrounding these critiques is that Justices are appointed not elected, and thus undermine the principle of majority rule in the U.S. constitutional democratic order. Although these critiques are legitimate in terms of claims about unelected Supreme Court Justices’ seemingly discretionary powers over elected legislative bodies, and the uncertain policy implications of judicial pronouncements on the broader society, there is, nevertheless, a positive application of judicial review as a tool Justices use as part of their educative role overcoming the so-called “counter-majoritarian difficulty.” Through a close reading of oral arguments in Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) and San Antonio vs. Rodriguez (1973)-two landmark cases invoking the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitution-the article shows how appointed Justices adjudicate individual cases on appeal and attempt to educate (through an argumentative, reason-based and question-centered process) citizenlitigants and their legal representatives about the importance of equality, fairness and ethical responsibility even prior to rendering final decisions on policy controversies that have broader national social, political and economic implications.

12

Rola Sądu Najwyższego Państwa Izrael w kontekście stabilności ustroju politycznego opartego na konstytucji nieskodyfikowanej

70%

Perlikowski Ł.

Przegląd Sejmowy

|

2022

|

issue 1(168)

119-136

EN

The article concerns the stability of a specific political system based on the so-called non--codified constitution, which was formed in the State of Israel. The main goal is to present and characterise the systemic position of the Supreme Court in this country and, above all, the competences of this body in the field of maintaining political stability and public order. There are two main hypotheses in the paper. According to the first one, the Supreme Court is especially predestined to perform stability functions. According to second hypothesis a system based on an uncodified constitution supports the actions of the Supreme Court aimed at achieving a state of political stability. In the course of the analysis, tools from such disciplines as political theory, jurisprudence and the science of constitutional law were used. At the beginning of the article, the research perspective was defined, the most important element of which is the operationalization of the general concept of “stability” and the concept of “political stability”.

13

Modele pozaparlamentarnej kontroli konstytucyjności prawa

70%

Szymanek J.

Przegląd Sejmowy

|

2018

|

issue 5(148)

95–116

EN

The article presents models of extra-parliamentary constitutional review of law. The starting point is the methodological discussion of various concepts of the division and types of review, i.a. political vs judicial, strong vs weak, centralized vs decentralized. Most often the constitutional review of law is classified into American-type review (judicial review) and European-type review (review performed by constitutional courts). This dichotomous classification is often replaced with the categories of “dispersed review” and “concentrated review”, which is the most often classification, at the same time clearly expressing the features distinguishing the two review mechanisms. While the American model does not raise serious discussions, the European model — also referred to as Kelsenian or Austrian model — is controversial. It can be subclassified into original (pure) model and its various mutations, referred to as the mixed European model of the constitutional review of law, most often applied in practice. Moreover, other types of review are also applied in Europe, hence the French and the Scandinavian models are also sometimes distinguished. Regardless of the classification, all review models are now being homogenized. This means that the review is performed by the courts (concrete review is introduced), the protection of rights and freedoms of an individual is emphasized, and political consequences of constitutional review are becoming more significant, as a result of which the organ performing the constitutional review becomes a political, active authority within the state.

14

Constitutional Courts and the Implementation of EU Directives: A Comparative Analysis

70%

Kustra-Rogatka A.

Polish Yearbook of International Law

|

2018

|

vol. 38

189-208

EN

This article concerns constitutional problems related to the implementation of EU directives seen from both the legal and comparative perspectives. The directives are a source of law which share a number of characteristic features that significantly affect and determine the specificity of Member States’ constitutional review of the directives as well as the legal acts that implement them. The review of the constitutionality of EU directives is carried out in accordance with the provisions of national implementing acts. Member States’ constitutional courts adopt two basic positions in this respect. The first position (adopted by, inter alia, the French Constitutional Council and German Federal Constitutional Court) is based on the assumption of a partial “constitutional immunity” of the act implementing the directive, which results in only a partial control of the constitutionality of the implementing acts, i.e. the acts of national law implementing such directives. The second position, (adopted, explicitly or implicitly by, inter alia, the Austrian Federal Constitutional Court, Czech Constitutional Court, Polish Constitutional Court, Romanian Constitutional Court and Slovak Constitutional Court) concerns the admissibility of a full review of the implementing acts. This leads to the admissibility of an indirect review of the content of the directive if the Court examines the provision as identical in terms of content with an act of EU law. Another issue is related to the application of the EU directives as indirect yardsticks of review. The French Constitutional Council case-law on review of the proper implementation of EU directives represents the canon in this regard. Nonetheless, interesting case studies of further uses of EU directives as indirect yardsticks of review can be found in the case law of other constitutional courts, such as the Belgian Constitutional Court or Spanish Constitutional Court. The research presented in this paper is based on the comparative method. The scope of the analysis covers case law of the constitutional courts of both old and new Member States. It also includes a presentation of recent jurisprudential developments, focusing on the constitutional case-law regarding the Data Retention Directive and the Directive on Combating Terrorism.

15

Judicial review of the acts of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office - possible shortcomings and several considerations in relation to the Slovak Republic and its legislation

70%

Ružičková V.

The Lawyer Quarterly

|

2021

|

vol. 11

|

issue 4

665-681

EN

Creation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office was from its very beginning accompanied by a wide-ranging debate regarding the most challenging issues, one of them being judicial review of its acts. This article deliberates on several groups of these acts and their review by either national courts or Court of Justice of the European Union. Where appropriate, in analyses their review in relation to the Slovak Republic. As a conclusion, it offers several considerations as to the Member States’ obligation to provide for effective judicial protection.

16

Freedom of speech, propaganda and EU at war: case of Russia today France

70%

Říha M.

The Lawyer Quarterly

|

2024

|

vol. 14

|

issue 1

111-122

EN

The unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014 triggered the need for a European response. With unprecedented speed, the Union adopted a series of restrictive measures limiting trade with the Russian Federation, freezing the assets of individuals, and restricting their activities in the Single Market. The Union also had to address the issue of the undermining of European unity and society by Russian media houses based in Member States. Restrictions on the broadcasting of Russia Today France were subsequently challenged in the European General Court. This was the first time the Court had ruled on restrictions on the activities of an entire editorial office. The days of innocence are coming to an end and days of hard choices are becoming the norm as the Union begins to assume its geopolitical responsibilities.

17

Kontrola sądu administracyjnego w zakresie ustalania stanu faktycznego sprawy przez organ administracji publicznej jako istotny element prawa do sądu

61%

Nędzarek A.

Studia Prawnicze

|

2014

|

issue 4 (200)

137-158

EN

In order to ensure that the right to bring an action before a court, which in substantive terms is understood as safeguard of the effective protection of individuals’ rights, is exercised and that a fair judgment is entered, the administrative courts may review the correctness of actions taken by governmental bodies in establishing the facts of the case, subject to the principle of legality. For this reason, it is necessary for the administrative courts to provide reasons for their judgments so as to demonstrate that the review of an administrative instrument was comprehensive and took account of all the facts of the case. The reasons so provided may cause the complainant to believe that he has indeed been granted legal protection. Moreover, this may demonstrate that the administrative courts not only review compliance with the principle of legality, but primarily exercise judicial power conferred on them. Therefore, it is appropriate to state that the applicable Polish regulations on the administrative courts safeguard the individual’s right to bring an action before a court both in formal and material sense.

18

Review of Administrative Justice in the Republic of Kosovo

61%

Pepaj I.

Academicus. International Scientific Journal

|

2015

|

issue 12

155-168

EN

The present paper aims to provide a real view of adjudication of administrative cases in Kosovo. The issue of adjudication of administrative cases in the Republic of Kosovo remains a challenge following justice reforms which began in 2013 and are still on-going. Kosovo as a new country faces difficulties in professionalization of public administration and this is closely related to large number of case that are subject of judicial review which is not a case with other countries which have longer experience in public administration. In this context, more attention has been paid to review of administrative acts and issues with special focus on judicial review, following with legal remedies, administration silence as cause of judicial review. The paper also contains information about administrative justice in Kosovo before and 2013, and its current state. New court structure brought with New Law on Courts which entered into force in 2013 affected administrative justice substantially. In the previous system, Kosovo Supreme Court was the only instance handling administrative disputes. In this regard, the issue of effective legal remedies was not in place as required by international standards. However, new court structure brought significant changes regarding legal remedies in administrative justice by setting up three court instances; Administrative departments within Prishtina Basic Court and Appellate Court as well as Supreme Court extraordinary legal remedies review.

19

Abstrakcyjna kontrola konstytucyjności – 25 lat doświadczeń Najwyższego Sądu Federacji Brazylii

61%

de Limas Tomio F. R., Robl Filho I. N.

Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego

|

2014

|

issue 5 (21)

11-37

PL

Artykuł podejmuje temat scentralizowanej i abstrakcyjnej kontroli konstytucyjności dokonywanej przez Federalny Sąd Najwyższy Brazylii oraz metody i teoretyczne podejścia w zakresie empirycznych badań procesu podejmowania decyzji i interpretacji prawa. Artykuł obejmuje swoim zakresem badanie 5011 decyzji Sądu podjętych w latach 1988–2013, przyjmując cztery wzajemnie się wykluczające hipotezy: H1) Sąd w procesie podejmowa-nia decyzji o niekonstytucyjności przyjmuje rolę veto player (podmiotu, bez którego zgody nie można dokonać zmiany status quo), zwiększając polityczną stabilność poprzez redukowanie znaczenia wyboru większości i eksponowanie istoty jednomyślności, H2) sąd konstytucyjny nie jest podmiotem o randze veto player, ponieważ instytucjonalnie proces powoływania sędziów sądu wskazuje na absorbowanie przez sąd roli innych veto players w procesie kontroli, a w konsekwencji: H3) liczba podmiotów uprawnionych do wszczynania postępowania przed sądem wpływa na zwiększenie stabilności prowadzonej polityki i redukuje znaczenie obranych celów polityki rządzącej większości oraz H4) liczba tych podmiotów wyznacza wzrost stabilizacji polityki stanów w federacji i pozostaje bez szkody dla polityki federalnej. W konkluzji, będącej efektem rozległych badań empirycznych, autorzy znajdują potwierdzenie hipotezy pierwszej (H1) w procesie podejmowania decyzji na poziomie stanowym i nieco mniej na poziomie federalnym, odrzucając częściowo hipotezę drugą (H2). Wskazują także, badając strukturę podmiotów składających wnioski do sądu o badanie konstytucyjności, że sądowa kontrola jest używana przez mniejszości w celu wskazania swojej politycznej pozycji i zwiększenia szans na sukces wyborczy w przyszłości (H3). Sądowa kontrola jest skierowana na wzrost stabilności polityki stanów, redukując rolę większości w decentralizacji władzy państwa federacyjnego (H4).

EN

This paper analyzes judicial review (concentrated and abstract) exercised by the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court (STF) and the methods for and theories that allow an empirical approach to this phenomenon as a decision-making process, making use of political institutions (distribution of powers and competences) and legal interpretation (legal literature and concepts). The institutional context of the decision-making process assigned by the Brazilian Constitution to the Federal Supreme Court (STF) makes it act by means of concentrated judicial review, ascribing to it the power to judge the constitutionality of federal and state law or normative acts, judicially reviewing these norms. The objective of this study is to determine the role of judicial review and the extent of concentrated judicial review, using as empirical basis the decisions of the Supreme Court in 5011 Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality (ADIs), adjudicated between 1988 and 2013. In the empirical test, there are the following main and mutually exclusive hypotheses: H1- Judicial review adds an institutional collective veto player in decision-making (institutional analysis), increasing policy stability while reducing size the winning set of the status quo or expanding the core of unanimity; H2- Judicial review does not add an institutional/collective veto player, because, institutionally, the constitutional design and the process of appointment of the members of STF indicates the validity of the absorption rule of the Court in concentrated judicial review by other veto players. Secondly, there are the following hypotheses: H3 – The number of legitimized plaintiffs for the petition of judicial review cases (ADI) increases policy stability and reduces importance of agenda setting and decision-making capacity of majority coalitions in decision making; H4 – The number of legitimate plaintiffs for the petition of judicializing measures increases the state/federative policy stability and is innocuous to federal policy stability and decision-making. Conclusions: The data demonstrates that H1 is supported in federative/state decision-making and little evident national level, partially refuting H2. However, given the number of legitimized plaintiffs, the massive introduction of judicializing measures at the national level indicates that judicial review is used by minorities as signaling for political positioning and maximizing future electoral opportunities without effectively restricting government (H3). Judicial review is directed preferentially to increase federative/state policy stability, reducing the role of opposition majorities or restricting decisions to extend the federal decentralization by state decision making (H4).

20

Zakres sądowej kontroli decyzji podjętych w indywidualnych sprawach studentów i doktorantów

61%

Daniel P.

Studia Prawa Publicznego

|

2015

|

issue 1(9)

75-96

EN

Under Art. 207 para. 1 of the Law on Higher Education, the decisions taken in individual cases concerning students and doctoral students fall under the provisions of the Act of 14 June 1960: “The Code of Administrative Procedure and the provisions of the making a complaint to the administrative court”. An analysis of the judgments of administrative courts shows that the judicial review of decisions concerning the above matters remains an open question. Hence the purpose of this study was to determine which cases relating to students and doctoral students are subject to judicial review. The depth, or detail, of the jurisdiction of administrative courts in those cases has also been examined. The undertaken considerations led to the conclusion that the scope of a judicial review of decisions taken in individual cases concerning students and doctoral students is patchy. The case law of administrative courts shows that exposure to the jurisdiction of the court is not limited to the sphere of relations in which the taken decision has legal eff ects; it must be determined whether a particular decision is taken on the basis of the provisions of the Act. In the context of a judicial review, the court is entitled to review the legality of general internal acts as long as they are the basis of the settlement in an individual case. At the same time, however, the court cannot control the acts of individual internal acts, even if they often constitute the basis for issuing a decision. In other words, an administrative court is not entitled to control the decisions taken on the basis of internal company acts which do not have any eff ect on the external environment and do not have a direct impact on the legal relation between a student and a university. A complaint on the inactivity of an administrative body of an establishment of higher education will be acceptable as long as such body has remained idle and fails to deliver an act or take an action pursuant to the existing legislation.

PL

Stosownie do treści art. 207 ust. 1 ustawy Prawo o szkolnictwie wyższym od decyzji podjętych w indywidualnych sprawach studentów i doktorantów stosuje się odpowiednio przepisy Ustawy z dnia 14 czerwca 1960 r. Kodeks postępowania administracyjnego oraz przepisy o zaskarżaniu decyzji do sądu administracyjnego. Analiza orzeczeń sądów administracyjnych wskazuje, że zagadnienie zakresu sądowej kontroli decyzji w indywidualnych sprawach tej grupy osób pozostaje kwestią otwartą. Stąd celem opracowania było wskazanie, które sprawy dotyczące studentów i doktorantów podlegają sądowej kontroli, a także określenie głębokości orzekania przez sądy administracyjne w powyższych sprawach. Podjęte rozważania skłaniają do wniosku, że zakres sądowej kontroli decyzji podjętych w indywidualnych sprawach studentów i doktorantów nie jest jednolity. Orzecznictwo sądów administracyjnych wskazuje, iż podleganie kognicji sądu nie jest ograniczone jedynie do sfery stosunków, w jakich dane rozstrzygnięcie wywołuje skutki prawne, lecz wymaga określenia, czy dana decyzja jest podejmowana na podstawie przepisów ustawy. W ramach sądowej kontroli sąd jest uprawniony do badania legalności wewnątrzzakładowych aktów generalnych, na podstawie których wydawane są rozstrzygnięcia indywidualne, nie może natomiast kontrolować wewnątrzzakładowych aktów indywidualnych, stanowiących niekiedy podstawę wydawania decyzji. Nie jest więc on uprawniony do kontrolowania, w ramach wniesionych skarg, rozstrzygnięć podjętych na podstawie aktów wewnątrzzakładowych, które nie wywołują skutków na zewnątrz, a więc niemających bezpośrednio wpływu na stosunek administracyjnoprawny łączący studenta z uczelnią. Za dopuszczalne uznać należy również wniesienie skargi na bezczynność organu uczelni wyższej, o ile organ ten pozostaje bezczynny w zakresie wydania aktu lub podjęcia czynności na podstawie obowiązujących przepisów.

Refine search results

Judicial Review – historia i współczesność

Prawnomiędzynarodowy standard sądowej kontroli w sprawach związanych z zabezpieczeniem społecznym a regulacje polskie

Judicial review of arbitration proceedings in light of international practice

The role of parliamentary autonomy in constitutional review

Judicial Review of the Implementation of Development Policy – Ten Years of Practice

Institution of taxing discretion: between tax law and taxing arbitrariness

Sądowa kontrola konstytucyjności ustaw zmieniających konstytucję w Indiach

Putting Dawn Raids under Control

What Can We Learn About Regulatory Agencies and Regulated Parties from the Empirical Study of Judicial Review of Regulatory Agencies’ Decisions? The Case of Croatia

Separate, Equal, or Separate-But-Equal? The Changing Image of Race in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decisions

U.S. Supreme Court in the civil rights era: Deliberative Democracy and its educative institutional role, 1950s–1970s

Rola Sądu Najwyższego Państwa Izrael w kontekście stabilności ustroju politycznego opartego na konstytucji nieskodyfikowanej

Modele pozaparlamentarnej kontroli konstytucyjności prawa

Constitutional Courts and the Implementation of EU Directives: A Comparative Analysis

Judicial review of the acts of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office - possible shortcomings and several considerations in relation to the Slovak Republic and its legislation

Freedom of speech, propaganda and EU at war: case of Russia today France

Kontrola sądu administracyjnego w zakresie ustalania stanu faktycznego sprawy przez organ administracji publicznej jako istotny element prawa do sądu

Review of Administrative Justice in the Republic of Kosovo

Abstrakcyjna kontrola konstytucyjności – 25 lat doświadczeń Najwyższego Sądu Federacji Brazylii

Zakres sądowej kontroli decyzji podjętych w indywidualnych sprawach studentów i doktorantów