Suchergebnisse

The study aims to analyze the general principles of the administrative judiciary in the United Arab Emirates in comparison with Islamic law by examining the history of the administrative judiciary in Islamic law and Emirati legislation, identifying obstacles to the application and development of administrative judiciary in the United Arab Emirates, and evaluating the role of the administrative judiciary in monitoring the work of the official administration In the United Arab Emirates. The problem of the study is the modernity of the administrative judiciary and its limitation to annulment, compensation, and the disciplinary proceedings. The researcher uses the descriptive-analytical approach and the comparative approach to achieve the objectives of the study and to find solutions to the problem at hand. The study concludes with a set of results and recommendations, the most important of which is that Islam was the first religion to come up with the idea of establishing an office for adjudicating claims of injustice. The administrative judiciary is considered a real guarantee to control the decisions of the official administration and not to oppress individuals. Besides, the administrative judiciary in the UAE is newly established compared to the administrative judiciary in other countries.

The study is the result of a legal comparative analysis of the directions of reforms in the administrative judiciary in the countries of young democracy: Poland, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Croatia, Serbia, Hungary, Ukraine, Georgia and Kazakhstan. The analysis was carried out with reference to the patterns developed in old European democracies, mainly in Austria and Germany. Papers on reforms of the administrative judiciary in each of these countries were delivered at the international scientific conference: Reforms of administrative judiciary in the countries of young democracy (10–11.06.2021, Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Lodz). They focused on three issues: 1) contemporary challenges of the rule of law and administrative judiciary, 2) directions of changes in the national systems of administrative judiciary, 3) the future of administrative judiciary. The content of the study refers to this system of issues, which reflects the stages of development of administrative judiciary in the countries of young democracy. The conclusions drawn from the analysis show the results of reforms at each of these stages – from the constitutionalization of the rule of law, through the independence of the court-administrative procedure, to the stage of the present, extremely difficult challenges, not only of a procedural nature. ; Opracowanie stanowi wynik prawnoporównaczej analizy kierunków reform sądownictwa administracyjnego w państwach młodej demokracji: Polski, Czech, Litwy, Chorwacji, Serbii, Węgier, Ukrainy, Gruzji i Kazachstanu, w nawiązaniu do wzorów wypracowanych w starych demokracjach europejskich, głównie w Austrii i Niemczech. Wygłoszone na międzynarodowej konferencji naukowej: Reformy sądownictwa administracyjnego w państwach młodej demokracji (10–11.06.2021r. WPiA UŁ) referaty na temat reform sądownictwa administracyjnego w każdym z tych państw koncentrowały się na trzech zagadnieniach: 1) współczesne wyzwania praworządności a sądownictwo administracyjne, 2) kierunki przemian w krajowych ...

The study is the result of a legal comparative analysis of the directions of reforms in the administrative judiciary in the countries of young democracy: Poland, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Croatia, Serbia, Hungary, Ukraine, Georgia and Kazakhstan. The analysis was carried out with reference to the patterns developed in old European democracies, mainly in Austria and Germany. Papers on reforms of the administrative judiciary in each of these countries were delivered at the international scientific conference: Reforms of administrative judiciary in the countries of young democracy (10–11.06.2021, Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Lodz). They focused on three issues: 1) contemporary challenges of the rule of law and administrative judiciary, 2) directions of changes in the national systems of administrative judiciary, 3) the future of administrative judiciary. The content of the study refers to this system of issues, which reflects the stages of development of administrative judiciary in the countries of young democracy. The conclusions drawn from the analysis show the results of reforms at each of these stages – from the constitutionalization of the rule of law, through the independence of the court-administrative procedure, to the stage of the present, extremely difficult challenges, not only of a procedural nature. ; Opracowanie stanowi wynik prawnoporównaczej analizy kierunków reform sądownictwa administracyjnego w państwach młodej demokracji: Polski, Czech, Litwy, Chorwacji, Serbii, Węgier, Ukrainy, Gruzji i Kazachstanu, w nawiązaniu do wzorów wypracowanych w starych demokracjach europejskich, głównie w Austrii i Niemczech. Wygłoszone na międzynarodowej konferencji naukowej: Reformy sądownictwa administracyjnego w państwach młodej demokracji (10–11.06.2021 r. WPiA UŁ) referaty na temat reform sądownictwa administracyjnego w każdym z tych państw koncentrowały się na trzech zagadnieniach: 1) współczesne wyzwania praworządności a sądownictwo administracyjne, 2) kierunki przemian w krajowych systemach sądownictwa administracyjnego, 3) przyszłość sądownictwa administracyjnego. Treść opracowania nawiązuje do tego układu zagadnień, który odzwierciedla etapy rozwoju sądownictwa administracyjnego w państwach młodej demokracji. Płynące z przeprowadzonej analizy wnioski pokazują wyniki reform na każdym z tych etapów – od konstytucjonalizacji zasady praworządności, przez usamodzielnienie się procedury sądowoadministracyjnej, aż po etap obecnych, niezwykle trudnych wyzwań nie tylko procesowej natury.

Objective: This study objective is necessary to understand the concepts related to quality in the administrative judiciary: perspectives from France. The current study also identifies the main requirements for achieving quality in the administrative judiciary function. Method: The study embraces the descriptive and analytical approaches in order to identify and analyze the concepts and measures of quality that are compatible with the nature and specificity of administrative cases. Results and conclusion: The study has reached some results, the most important of which are: The real measure of quality in the administrative judiciary is represented as the achievement of the strategic objective of the administrative judiciary. Another result turns out to be that the quality of the performance of the administrative judiciary, whether quantitative or qualitative, is, in fact, just a means to achieve this goal.

"The book presets Polish administrative judiciary as part of institutional environment of the economy. Polish administrative judiciary system, tasked with controlling the legality of the public administration activities, took its current form in 2004. It contain 16 first instance courts and the Supreme Administrative Court. Contrary to the ordinary judiciary in Poland, this system is managed by the judge - the President of the SAC - not the Minister of Justice. The book blends multiple approaches - from first-hand historical account of the creation and reforms of the administrative courts system, through quantitative analysis of its performance to the qualitative analysis of the court verdicts trends, including the dialogue of administrative courts with domestic Constitutional Tribunal and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Authors of the chapters include Supreme Administrative Court judges, scholars and practicing lawyers"--

What distinguishes the world today is the tendency to respect and guarantee human rights through international covenants and agreements. Or ignoring certain legal rules established by the legislator to guarantee the rights and freedoms of individuals. Therefore, our aim was to highlight the role of the administrative judiciary in overseeing the work of the administration and its actions and to highlight the forms of such supervision and the importance of the emergence of the administrative judiciary as a specialized judiciary in administrative matters. The legislator has traditionally removed some jurisdictions from the jurisdiction of the administrative judiciary, such as acts of sovereignty, presidential decrees, and some administrative decisions. Respect for the rights and freedoms of individuals requires the existence of rules that prevent the administration from violating these rights or violating the principle of legality, provided that this does not prejudice the ability of the administration to perform its functions to the fullest. An administration that directly affects the freedoms and rights of individuals. The administration uses a set of systems and means to maintain public order with its three elements (public security, public health and public order). Administrative control orders may be individual or collective. We believe that it is necessary to set limits on the powers of the administration in exercising the powers of administrative control by subjecting it to the control of the administrative judiciary, whether in normal or exceptional circumstances. We concluded that the introduction of the principle of legality and the rule of law is the hallmark of the legal state and is the basic guarantee of public rights and freedoms. This is achieved through the extension of administrative control over the administration's work with full independence. All over Iraq.

WILENSKI CONTENDS THAT ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM CAN WORK IN FAVOR OF EFFICIENCY AND OTHER SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT VALUES OR EQUALITY AND OTHER EQUITY VALUES BUT THE IDEA THAT IT SHOULD PROMOTE SOCIAL EQUITY AMONG EMPLOYEES OR CLIENTS IS SO NEW IT IS MISSING FROM MUCH LITERATURE ON ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT.

Over the past 40 years, and concomitant with the enormous expansion of governmental function and regulatory reach, an administrative law judiciary has emerged to assist government agencies with the fact-finding and individual case application needs of their regulatory mission. The legislation, case law, and national conceptions of judicial function that shaped the evolution have worked to render that adjudicative corps less an instrument and aid for executive rulemaking and discretionary exercise and more a court-like forum for final determination of rights and obligations in disputed cases of benefit entitlement, regulatory observance, and legal compliance. Fortunately, the realities of administrative law judge (ALJ) functions have moved in this direction. The vast majority of ALJs, at least at the federal level, are now engaged in dealing with an explosion of benefit and enforcement cases well suited to trial-type resolution of disputes in which government is a contending party. The development, however, brings into question the status of ALJs, almost unique to the United States, as agency employees and as surrogates whose decisions are "correctable" at agency level rather than the final determinations of a "trial judiciary." Accordingly, it appears that a long list of proposals are ripe for evaluation and implementation.

Genel idari yargı Danıştay, bölge idare mahkemesi, idare ve vergi mahkemesinden oluşmaktadır. İdare ve vergi mahkemeleri ilk derece mahkemeleridir. Bölge idare mahkemesi istinaf mahkemesi iken, Danıştay hem ilk derece mahkemesi hem de temyiz merci, idare ve vergi mahkemeleri ise ilk derece mercileridir. Bu mahkemeler arasında görev uyuşmazlığı, olumlu görev uyuşmazlığı ve olumsuz görev uyuşmazlığı olarak görülebilmektedir. İlk derece mahkemeleri olan Danıştay, idare ve vergi mahkemeleri arasında, istinaf merci olan bölge idare mahkemesi ile temyiz merci olan Danıştay arasında, Danıştay daireleri arasında ve bölge idare mahkemesi daireleri arasında görev uyuşmazlıkları çıkabilmektedir. İdari yargıda çıkan bu görev uyuşmazlıklarının çözümü ve çözümünde yetkili olan makamların tespiti önem arz etmektedir. ; The general administrative judiciary consists of the Council of State, the district administrative court, the administrative and tax courts. Administrative and tax courts are first-instance courts. While the district administrative court is the appeal court, the Council of State is both the first-instance court and the appellate court, and the administrative and tax courts are the first-instance courts. These courts can be seen as a dispute of duty, a dispute of positive duty and a dispute of negative duty. The Council of State, the first instance courts, may have disputes between the administration and tax courts, between the regional administrative court, which is the referral authority, and the Council of State, the appeals body, between the Council of State offices and the district administrative court offices. The resolution of these disputes in the administrative judiciary and the determination of the authorities that are competent in the solution are important.