in English Title: Decisions of administrative courts concerning actions against the decision of administrative body in cases of administrative delicts A subject matter of this thesis is analysis of current law and judicial practice in field of review of decisions of administrative bodies in cases of administrative delicts. In introduction of the thesis the author briefly sums up the historical development of the administrative jurisprudence and the influence of international regulation and judicial decisions of the international courts. The author describes and analyzes international requirements on deciding in full jurisdiction and relevant law in the Czech Republic. In this context, the author briefly analyzes the current and relevant law in Germany and Poland. The thesis analyzes whether the Czech law meets the requirements on deciding in full jurisdiction of not. The author describes chosen particularities of law regarding the judicial review of administrative delicts and the influence of judicial decisions upon the limits of the relevant law. The thesis further analyzes judicial decisions and its influence upon possible extension of protection of offender of administrative delict. The author further considers and analyzes court's right to moderate the punishment, its legal scope and possible...

The article begins by recognizing that the Administrative Process in Peru is full jurisdiction, protects the legal situations in addition to control the legality of the administrative acts. Then the author examines the Tax Administration, specifically if SUNAT has active legitimacy to sue in a Contentious Administrative Process against the decision issued by the Tax Court that revoked or annulled their administrative acts, concluding that it does not have legitimacy but, exceptionally, according to article 157 of the Tax Code, can sue when SUNAT demonstrates that RTFs are not according to the parameters of article 10 of the General Administrative Procedure Act, confirming that the causal most used by SUNAT are those of the numeral 1 and 2, referred to the resolutions which cause serious disability vice, which, according to the author, is not the same as a different interpretative approach. Finally, the author concludes that for tax issues does not apply the second paragraph of Article 13 of the Law on Administrative Process; apply the article 157 of the Tax Code, as the special rule. / El presente artículo parte por reconocer que el proceso contencioso administrativo en el Perú es de plena jurisdicción, esto es, que protege las situaciones jurídicas de los administrados además de la legalidad del acto administrativo.Así, se lleva a cabo un análisis sobre la legitimidad activa de la Administración Tributaria, específicamente la SUNAT, para interponer una demanda contencioso administrativa contra la Resolución emitida por el Tribunal Fiscal (RTF) que revocó o anuló su acto administrativo concluyendo que no la tiene pero que, excepcionalmente, de acuerdo al artículo 157° del Código Tributario, podría demandar cuando demuestre fehacientemente que la RTF es nula de acuerdo a los parámetros del artículo 10° de la Ley del Procedimiento Administrativo General (LPAG), constatándose que las causales más utilizadas por la SUNAT son las del numeral 1 y 2 de dicha norma, referidas a aquellas resoluciones que tengan un vicio grave de invalidez, lo que, según la autora, no es lo mismo que un distinto criterio interpretativo. Por último, se señala que en relación a los temas tributarios no resulta aplicable el segundo párrafo del artículo 13º de la Ley del Proceso Contencioso Administrativo si no el referido artículo 157° del Código Tributario, al ser la norma especial.