Selective retroactivity: criteria for determining the moment of declaring a law null and void in a Russian administrative judicial proceedings

IF 0.3 Q4 LAW
A. Chirninov
{"title":"Selective retroactivity: criteria for determining the moment of declaring a law null and void in a Russian administrative judicial proceedings","authors":"A. Chirninov","doi":"10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(4).162-178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The subject. Any legal order is based on a strict hierarchy of normative acts, built according to their legal force. This hierarchy has been ensured by, among other things, exercising judicial review. In Russia, a normative act can be challenged on the grounds that it contradicts laws of greater legal force, except for the Russian Constitution, in the procedure provided for in Chapter 21 of the Russian Code of Administrative Proceedings. In doing so, one of the crucial questions to be decided in the course of judicial review of normative acts is the determination of the moment when a normative act contradicting a normative act of greater legal force ceases to be valid. This temporal aspect is extremely important because it determines whether individuals whose rights have been violated by law enforcement acts (acts involving application of the law) based on a null and void law are entitled to seek judicial relief. The purpose of the article is to confirm or refute hypothesis about the permissibility of a situation in which unlawful normative act remains valid for a certain time. The methodology of research includes formal legal analysis and interpretation of the norms of the Russian Code of Administrative Proceedings, decisions of the Russian Constitutional Court and other courts.","PeriodicalId":40342,"journal":{"name":"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(4).162-178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The subject. Any legal order is based on a strict hierarchy of normative acts, built according to their legal force. This hierarchy has been ensured by, among other things, exercising judicial review. In Russia, a normative act can be challenged on the grounds that it contradicts laws of greater legal force, except for the Russian Constitution, in the procedure provided for in Chapter 21 of the Russian Code of Administrative Proceedings. In doing so, one of the crucial questions to be decided in the course of judicial review of normative acts is the determination of the moment when a normative act contradicting a normative act of greater legal force ceases to be valid. This temporal aspect is extremely important because it determines whether individuals whose rights have been violated by law enforcement acts (acts involving application of the law) based on a null and void law are entitled to seek judicial relief. The purpose of the article is to confirm or refute hypothesis about the permissibility of a situation in which unlawful normative act remains valid for a certain time. The methodology of research includes formal legal analysis and interpretation of the norms of the Russian Code of Administrative Proceedings, decisions of the Russian Constitutional Court and other courts.
选择性溯及力:在俄罗斯行政司法程序中确定宣布法律无效时刻的标准
这个话题。任何法律秩序都是建立在规范行为的严格等级之上的,这些规范行为是根据它们的法律效力建立起来的。除其他外,这种等级制度是通过实行司法审查来保证的。在俄罗斯,规范性行为可以在《俄罗斯行政诉讼法》第21章规定的程序中受到质疑,理由是它与具有更大法律效力的法律相抵触,但俄罗斯宪法除外。在这样做的过程中,在对规范性行为进行司法审查的过程中需要决定的一个关键问题是,确定与具有更大法律效力的规范性行为相矛盾的规范性行为何时停止有效。这一时间方面极为重要,因为它决定了权利受到基于无效法律的执法行为(涉及适用法律的行为)侵犯的个人是否有权寻求司法救济。该条的目的是确认或驳斥关于非法规范行为在一定时间内仍然有效的情况的可容许性的假设。研究方法包括正式的法律分析和对《俄罗斯行政诉讼法》规范、俄罗斯宪法法院和其他法院的判决的解释。
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
自引率
66.70%
发文量
79
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信