Search results

1

Nauka o kontroli – rzeczywistość czy postulat ? – wyodrębnianie się nowych gałęzi prawa

100%

Murat L.

Kontrola Państwowa

|

2015

|

vol. 60

|

issue 6 (365)

8-36

EN

Although auditing is considered an important field of legal studies, no separate methodological approach has been developed for it so far. In his article, the author supports the idea of distinguishing a new branch of law (audit law) and a new discipline of legal studies (audit studies). This distinction is justified by the substantial increase in the complexity of social relations and legal regulations since first such proposals appeared in the late 1960s and early 1970s. In fact, the ever-growing interest of jurisprudence in studying audit suggests that identification is already taking place. However, although auditing is considered a distinct field of legal studies, so far it has not been thoroughly examined from a theoretical perspective. Therefore, the author proposes a formal identification of audit law, audit studies and audit theory to stimulate a discussion on the whole audit system and audit lawfulness. A pivotal role in this breakthrough is played by the Supreme Audit Office which for years has been fostering audit studies.

2

Stosunek kontrolnoprawny –relacje prawne między kontrolującymi a kontrolowanymi

100%

Murat L.

Kontrola Państwowa

|

2016

|

vol. 61

|

issue 3 (368)

8-21

EN

To date, in audit studies the issue of legal relations between audit bodies and auditees has been discussed without differentiating the legal relation characteristic of auditing. Meanwhile, the President of NIK has several times emphasised the specificity of the relations between the Supreme Audit Office and its auditees. In response to complaints against NIK judged by administrative courts (in 2009 and in 2011), the President of NIK postulated to reject them as unacceptable, stating that “the cognition of the administrative court does not apply to the NIK audit activity, because the legal relation between NIK and an audited entity is not of administrative nature”. In his article, the author attempts to rationalise the stance of the NIK President by considering if, in the current state of the audit studies development, it is possible to differentiate the legal status related to auditing, and, if so, what its main characteristics are.

3

Naczelność Najwyższej Izby Kontroli

84%

Murat L.

Przegląd Sejmowy

|

2019

|

issue 3(152)

61–79

EN

The Constitution provides that the Supreme Audit Office (NIK) is the primary state audit institution. The profoundness of its “primacy” still awaits to be discovered. Legal scholars have not yet examined the meaning and the possible consequences of this attribute thoroughly enough. In the article this gap is filled by arguing that “primacy” shall be understood as the constitutional mission of NIK to safeguard the lawfulness of auditing. In particular, it entitles NIK to intensify efforts to secure the coherent interpretation of law by all auditing institutions. More uniform understanding of legal provisions may contribute to the increase of the overall stability of law, as the pressure on the parliament to explain its ambiguous laws by numerous amendments would eventually ease.

Refine search results

2 Kontrola Państwowa

1 Przegląd Sejmowy

3 Murat L.

1 2019

1 2016

1 2015

Nauka o kontroli – rzeczywistość czy postulat ? – wyodrębnianie się nowych gałęzi prawa

Stosunek kontrolnoprawny –relacje prawne między kontrolującymi a kontrolowanymi

Naczelność Najwyższej Izby Kontroli