Relations between courts and public administration in statutory construction Abstract Judicial review of administrative decisions (and statutory construction contained in them) may use divergent standards (strictness). The classical continental concept of administrative justice follows from the notion that courts answer questions of law independently of the administrative body. The goal of the thesis is to cast doubt on this concept and to define situations where it can be considered that courts could be deferential towards the public administration, i.e. leave certain space to the administration for its own interpretation, which the court would accept even though the court itself might not see the interpretation as the best one. The comparative part of the thesis shows that such an approach of administrative courts regarding interpretation made by public administration is not totally rare. That is mainly the case of the United States of America, where in the instance of ambiguous statutes or secondary legislation, the interpretation made by the agency charged with administering the law is rewarded with deference if such interpretation is at least permissible. Czech administrative courts (and the Constitutional Court) also often concede that there is a plurality of equally convincing legal interpretations....
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:nusl.cz/oai:invenio.nusl.cz:435936 |
| Date | January 2020 |
| Creators | Fronc, Jaromír |
| Contributors | Staša, Josef, Prášková, Helena |
| Source Sets | Czech ETDs |
| Language | Czech |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds