Administracinės teisės reguliavimo dalyko kaita – tai dėsningas istorinis procesas, kurio pasekmė - ypatingas šiuolaikinės administracinės teisės turinys ir specifika. Administracinės teisės, kaip atskiros teisės šakos, susiformavimą XVIII amžiuje sąlygojo kokybiškai naujų, socialiai reikšmingų visuomeninių santykių, reikalaujančių atskirų, specialių normų jiems reguliuoti, atsiradimas Europos valstybėse. Tolesnės administracinės teisės reguliavimo dalyko evoliucijos metu ieškoma tam tikrų ypatumų, leidžiančių atskirti administracinę teisę nuo kitų teisės šakų, tačiau šiuolaikinėje teisėje tradicinis teisės normų skirstymas į šakas praranda prasmę, nes nepaaiškina realiai susiformavusių tendencijų. Administracinės teisės, kaip atskiros teisės šakos, skyrimo kriterijai - nevienareikšmiai, todėl praktinė jų vertė yra sąlyginė. Esminis kriterijus, padedantis nustatyti šiuolaikinės administracinės teisės reguliavimo dalyko nuolat kintančią apimtį, yra jo santykis su kitomis teisinės sistemos dalimis. Vertybinių orientacijų poslinkių nulemta administracinės teisės reguliavimo dalyko kokybinė kaita sąlygoja šiuolaikinės administracinės teisės reguliacinės funkcijos nuolatinę plėtrą, didėjančią visų teisinės sistemos dalių sąveiką ir administracinės teisės misijos esminius turinio pokyčius. Ateityje šios tendencijos turėtų stiprėti, siekiant įgyvendinti esminę šiuolaikinės administracinės teisės paskirtį ir misiją - žmogaus teisių ir laisvių apsaugą. / The change of administrative law regulation subject is a long historical process, resulted in a specific content and particularity of contemporary administrative law. The formation of administrative law as a separate branch of law in the 18 century Europe was determined by the coming of qualitatively new, socially significant public intercourse which required special rules of organizing. In the further evolution of administrative law regulation subject certain characteristics are being sought, which could enable to distinguish administrative law from the other branches of law. Still in the contemporary legal system traditional attribution of law norms to separate branches of law looses its significant because it does not explain the real substantive tendencies. The criterions of the attribution of administrative law to a separate branch of law are ambiguous that is why their practical worth is conditional. Crucial criterion which helps to identify the scope of contemporary administrative law regulation subject is its relations to other parts of legal system. The qualitative change of administrative law regulation subject determined by the shift of value orientations conditions the constant expansion of the regulatory function of administrative law, growing interaction of all parts of the legal system and fundamental alteration of administrative law mission content. In the future these tendencies should intensify in order to implement the essential purpose and mission of... [to full text]

Šis magistro darbas skirtas tirti konstitucinėje jurisprudencijoje kuriamą Lietuvos administracinės teisės doktriną kaip visumą. Darbe nagrinėjamos šios konstitucinės administracinės teisės doktrinos identifikavimui būtinos prielaidos: „administracinės teisės doktrinos“ ir „konstitucinės jurisprudencijos“ sampratos, administracinės teisės doktrinos prigimtis, administracinės teisės doktrinos kūrimo skirtumai konstitucinėje akademinėje ir konstitucinėje teisminėje jurisprudencijoje, administracinės teisės doktrinos identifikavimo Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinio Teismo jurisprudencijoje kriterijai. Darbe analizuojamos administracinei teisei aktualios doktrininės nuostatos, išvestos kai kurių bendrųjų konstitucinių principų pagrindu, tiriamos jų sisteminės sąsajos su administracine teise. Atlikus tyrimą nustatyta, kad „administracinės teisės doktrinos“ ir „konstitucinės jurisprudencijos“ sampratoms būdingas dvilypiškumas, suponuojantis mokslinės ir oficialios teisminės administracinės teisės doktrinos atskyrimą. Oficialios konstitucinės administracinės teisės doktrinos kaip svarbiausios administracinės teisės srities normatyvinis turinys turi būti analizuojamas visų pirma teisės, o ne akademinės jurisprudencijos kontekste. Administracinės teisės doktrinos identifikavimo teisminėje konstitucinėje jurisprudencijoje pagrindiniu kriterijumi laikytinas konstitucinių doktrininių teiginių ryšys su administracine teise. Šis ryšys atskleidžiamas per administracinės teisės... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / This master‘s thesis is intended for research of administrative law doctrine, created in constitutional jurisprudence, as a whole. The paper examines these preconditions for identification of constitutional administrative law doctrine: concepts of „administrative law doctrine“ and „constitutional jurisprudence“, nature of administrative law doctrine, differences of administrative law doctrine creation in constitutional academic and constitutional judicial jurisprudence, administrative law doctrine identification criteria in the jurisprudence of Constituional Court of Republic of Lithuania. The paper examines important for administratve law doctrinal provisions, derived from some general constitutional principles, investigates their systematic linkages with administrative law. The research showed dualism of „administrative law doctrine“ and „constitutional jurisprudence“ concepts, implying separation of scietific and official judicial administrative law doctrine. Normative content of official constitutional administrative law doctrine as a key administrative law area must be analyzed primarily in the context of the law, but not in the context of academic jurisprudence. The main criterion of administrative law doctrine identification in the judicial constitutional jurisprudence should be considered linkage between constitutional doctrinal statements and administrative law. This linkage is revealed through the subject and method of administrative law. Performed analysis in the... [to full text]

Pas de résumé / Doctorat en droit / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

O presente trabalho tem por objetivo a análise da proposta de divisão do sistema jurídico-penal, com a criação de um direito penal secundário de características próprias, marcado pela não recorrência à pena privativa de liberdade e pelo estabelecimento de critérios materiais de seleção de condutas ilícitas. Para atingir mencionado desiderato foi feita uma análise das principais teorias que levaram ao direito penal secundário, a saber, direito penal de polícia, direito penal administrativo e direito penal de ordem. Também foi feito um estudo da evolução do tratamento do tema nos ordenamentos jurídicos alemão, português, espanhol e brasileiro, com enfoque nos critérios de alocação dos ilícitos entre os âmbitos de intervenção punitiva. Por fim, foram analisadas construções semelhantes às do direito penal secundário, procurando apontar suas semelhanças e diferenças. Após as conclusões sobre a construção teórica do direito penal secundário, pudemos nos direcionar para a proposição de uma remodelagem sistêmica dos mecanismos de intervenção punitiva do Estado, propondo, ao final, a partir da premissa central da necessidade de adoção de um direito punitivo geral, critérios materiais de alocação dos ilícitos entre os sistemas de intervenção punitiva do Estado, com base na estrutura da categoria da dignidade penal. / The purpose of this paper is to analyze the proposal to divide criminal legal system, with the creation of a secondary criminal law system with particular traits, characterized by the absence of recourse to imprisonment and the establishment of material criteria for the selection of misconducts. In order to reach its main purpose, analysis of the main theories leading to secondary criminal law, namely the police criminal law, the administrative criminal law and the order criminal law, was conducted. In addition, a study on the evolution of the treatment of the subject at the German, Portuguese, Spanish, and Brazilian legal systems was performed, focusing on the criteria for the allocation of the misconducts among the spheres of punitive intervention. Lastly, similar constructions to the secondary criminal law were analyzed, in order to highlight their similarities and differences. Following the conclusions on the theoretical structuring of secondary criminal law, a systemic reshaping of punitive intervention mechanism was proposed, in a manner that, at last, considering the central premise of the need to adopt a general punitive law, the establishment of material criteria for sorting the misconducts among the punitive intervention systems, relying on the criminal legitimacy category.

Dissertação voltada à investigação do debate doutrinário acerca do princípio da supremacia do interesse público sobre o particular no direito administrativo brasileiro. Busca identificar pontos de convergência entre as teses doutrinárias brasileiras que discutem este princípio para então, a partir de tais pontos, verificar a existência de algum substrato teórico evolutivo decorrente dos consensos identificados. Examina o debate mencionado através do estabelecimento de três dimensões de análise: a primeira, investigando as divergências teóricas que dizem respeito à noção jurídica de interesse público; a segunda, investigando as divergências teóricas que problematizam o caráter principiológico da supremacia do interesse público sobre o particular; e a terceira, investigando as divergências teóricas existentes quanto à centralidade do princípio da supremacia do interesse público sobre o particular no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro em potencial situação de compatibilidade ou incompatibilidade com o princípio da dignidade da pessoa humana e, consequentemente, com os direitos fundamentais do homem e com a teleologia democrática, promanada da constituição federal de 1988. Precede a mencionada investigação, sem embargo, alguns apontamentos acerca de questões correlatas ao debate, sobretudo, a importância do papel desempenhado pela doutrina administrativista tanto no processo evolutivo do princípio da supremacia do interesse público sobre o particular quanto no desenvolvimento histórico do direito administrativo brasileiro como um todo. / The present dissertation aims at investigating the doutrinary debate about the principle of supremacy of the public over private interest concerning Brazilian administrative law. The study focuses on identifying points of convergence within Brazilian doutrinary theses that discuss this principle to then from those points on verify the existence of any theoretical evolutionary substrate emerging from the consensus identified. It examines the above-mentioned debate by establishing three dimensions of analysis: the first, investigating the theoretical divergences regarding the juridical concept of public interest; the second, investigating the theoretical divergences that problematize the law principle character of the supremacy of the public over private interest; and the third, investigating the theoretical divergences within the centrality of the principle of supremacy of the public over private interest concerning the Brazilian juridical system in potential situation of compatibility or incompatibility with the principle of dignity of the human being and, consequently, with the fundamental human rights and with the democratic teleology, which arises from the federal constitution of 1988. However, a few issues regarding questions related to the debate precede the above-mentioned investigation, especially the importance of the role of administrative doctrine not only in the evolutionary process of the principle of supremacy of the public over private interest but also in the historical development of Brazilian administrative law as a whole.

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.

Le droit administratif français est l’un des modèles principaux du droit administratif dans le monde. En Thaïlande, l’influence du droit administratif français dans le système juridique s’est notamment exprimée à partir la réforme du pays par le roi Chulalongkorn, Rama V, qui régna de 1868 à 1910, ainsi que lors de la Révolution de 1932. Le gouvernement de cette époque avait rétabli le concept juridique français. L’organisation administrative thaïlandaise est inspirée de celle de la France à plusieurs niveaux : l’administration centrale, l’administration déconcentrée, les collectivités territoriales et les établissements publics. En matière d’organisation de la justice administrative, il s’est inspiré des modèles français. La Constitution de 1997 a prévu l’établissement des juridictions administratives dans le système dualiste de juridiction. Par contre, le droit administratif des deux pays est, aujourd’hui, assez différent. Même si le droit administratif thaïlandais est très influencé par celui de la France, le premier a été transmué afin qu’il soit convenable dans son propre contexte, et le second a beaucoup changé et évolué. Donc, le mimétisme juridique thaïlandais ne doit pas être une imitation des lois et de la jurisprudence appliquée en France dans son intégralité à cause des disparités politiques, sociales et culturelles. De toute façon, la Thaïlande préfère encore choisir le droit administratif français comme « modèle type » pour améliorer son système administratif et juridique, par rapport aux autres systèmes juridiques dans le monde / French administrative law is one of the main models of administrative law in the world. In Thailand, the influence of French administrative law in the legal system was especially expressed from the reform of the country by King Chulalongkorn, Rama V, who reigned from 1868 to 1910 and during the 1932 Revolution; government of that time had restored the French legal concept. The Thai administrative organization is inspired by that of France at several levels: the central administration, the decentralized administration, local authorities and public institutions. In organization of administrative justice inspired by French models, the Constitution of 1997 provided for the establishment of administrative courts in the jurisdiction of dualistic system. By cons, administrative law in both countries is now quite different. Although the Thai administrative law is heavily influenced by that of France, the first was transmuted so that it is suitable in its own context, and the second has changed and evolved. So the Thai legal mimicry should not be a complete imitation of legislation and case law applied in France because of political differences, social and cultural. Anyway, Thailand still prefers to choose the French administrative law as “standard model” to improve its administrative and legal system, compared to other legal systems in the world

This thesis considers interpretive provisions in human rights legislation in the United Kingdom (UK), New Zealand and two Australian jurisdictions: the Australian Capital Territory and the State of Victoria. It deals with the relationship between certain common law interpretive principles which protect human rights and the rules under the interpretive provisions. It also considers what effect the interpretive provisions have on the overall approach to statutory interpretation, particularly in terms of their impact on the roles of intention and purpose. One of the themes of the thesis is that it is possible to identify a common methodology for the application of the various interpretive provisions. This is facilitated by an emphasis on the concept of purpose, which is flexible and capable of being identified and applied at higher levels of abstraction than the concept of intention as commonly applied by the courts. Despite this common methodology, the results of attempts at legislative rights-consistent interpretation in the relevant jurisdictions differ. We shall see that the UK courts have taken a broader interpretive approach than have their New Zealand and Australian counterparts. This will be explained by reference to the respective contexts of the human rights legislation in each jurisdiction, particularly in terms of legislative history. It will be argued that the purpose of the UK legislation to provide remedies in domestic courts for breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights provides the basis for the UK courts’ approach. The absence of this factor is the primary point of distinction between the UK on the one hand, and New Zealand and Australia on the other, though other issues will be explored. Finally, while as a matter of the interpretation of the UK legislation, and especially of the relevant interpretive provision, the approach of the UK courts is defensible, the significant risk to the principle of legal certainty which it poses will be highlighted.

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.

La substitution apparaît, en droit administratif français, comme une notion autonome dont l'existence fait débat. Emergeant au terme d'une démarche pointilleuse, la substitution peut être identifiée au moyen de deux critères, la carence et la volonté. Ce préalable indispensable permet de déterminer la teneur de la substitution et implique, subséquemment, de rejeter une acception étirée de la notion pour s'ouvrir à une signification resserrée mais non moins riche. Incontestablement, la recherche atteste de la diversité, non-dirimante, de l'objet d'étude. Transcendant l'observation dérangeante de cette complexité, la substitution révèle une convergence fonctionnelle déterminante. Pourtant, l'hétérogénéité apparente de l'objet d'étude conduit au constat selon lequel cette convergence est intrinsèquement dissimulée. En tout état de cause, une analyse renouvelée aboutit à la révélation progressive de cette cohérence. Si la réflexion historique permet d'expliquer et de dépasser la méfiance nourrie à l'égard de la substitution, cette étape n'est qu'une esquisse, la systématisation trouvant sa confirmation dans une justification finaliste. / In french administrative law, substitution appears as an independent notion which has been debated for a long time. Rising from a pernickety approach, substitution may be identified by two criteria : deficiency and will. This mandatory preamble helps define substitution's content and implies to reject a spread conception of the notion in order to result in a tighten and substantial meaning. Research reveals indisputable duality within the subject's study. Piercing through its disturbing complexity, substitution shows a decisive functional abundance. The visible subject's diversity however leads to point that its abundance is inherently hidden. However, a renewed analysis leads to progressively reveal this unity. Although historical reflexion explains and surpasses distrust in substitution, this step is a sketch, the general analysis is confirmed by a final proof.