Behördliche Beratung und Informationsrisiko

Q4 Social Sciences
Verwaltung Pub Date : 2020-10-01 DOI:10.3790/VERW.53.4.501
Johannes Eichenhofer
{"title":"Behördliche Beratung und Informationsrisiko","authors":"Johannes Eichenhofer","doi":"10.3790/VERW.53.4.501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the social constitutional state, the administration’s mandate is not limited to making legal and expedient decisions. According to § 25 of the German Administrative Procedure Act and parallel provisions in social, tax and procurement laws, the office administrators are obliged to advise the individual to a certain extent on the exercise of their rights, whereby the requirement of legality and expediency is at least to some extent supplemented by a requirement of optimization. The present contribution will discuss the justification, the regulatory context, and the extent of the duty to provide advice, as well as the consequences of insufficient or incorrect advice. The institution of official advice is interesting for the discipline of administrative law as it stands at the interface of civil law and administrative law (substantive and procedural), and therefore, is able to reconstruct its dogmatic form on the basis of the “doctrine of legal relations”. Finally, the official duties to advise exemplify how administrative procedural law deals with information risks – a hitherto neglected component of general information administrative law.","PeriodicalId":36848,"journal":{"name":"Verwaltung","volume":"53 1","pages":"501-534"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Verwaltung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3790/VERW.53.4.501","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the social constitutional state, the administration’s mandate is not limited to making legal and expedient decisions. According to § 25 of the German Administrative Procedure Act and parallel provisions in social, tax and procurement laws, the office administrators are obliged to advise the individual to a certain extent on the exercise of their rights, whereby the requirement of legality and expediency is at least to some extent supplemented by a requirement of optimization. The present contribution will discuss the justification, the regulatory context, and the extent of the duty to provide advice, as well as the consequences of insufficient or incorrect advice. The institution of official advice is interesting for the discipline of administrative law as it stands at the interface of civil law and administrative law (substantive and procedural), and therefore, is able to reconstruct its dogmatic form on the basis of the “doctrine of legal relations”. Finally, the official duties to advise exemplify how administrative procedural law deals with information risks – a hitherto neglected component of general information administrative law.
监管部门和新闻风险
在社会宪政国家,行政部门的任务不限于做出合法和权宜的决定。根据《德国行政程序法》第25条以及社会、税务和采购法的平行规定,办公室管理人员有义务在一定程度上就其权利的行使向个人提供建议,因此,合法性和便利性的要求至少在某种程度上得到了优化要求的补充。本贡献将讨论提供建议的理由、监管背景和义务的范围,以及建议不足或不正确的后果。官方咨询制度对行政法学科来说很有意思,因为它处于民法和行政法(实体法和程序法)的界面,因此能够在“法律关系学说”的基础上重建其教条主义形式。最后,公务建议职责举例说明了行政诉讼法如何处理信息风险——这是迄今为止被忽视的一般信息行政法的组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Verwaltung
Verwaltung Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信