SUBJECTS OF INITIATING THE ISSUE OF SECURING A CLAIM BY SUSPENSION OF AN INDIVIDUAL ACT OR NORMATIVE LEGAL ACT

V. Kuzmych
{"title":"SUBJECTS OF INITIATING THE ISSUE OF SECURING A CLAIM BY SUSPENSION OF AN INDIVIDUAL ACT OR NORMATIVE LEGAL ACT","authors":"V. Kuzmych","doi":"10.17721/2227-796x.2022.1.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose. The objective of the article is to identify problems related to the regulatory establishment of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts (individual acts or normative legal acts) of subjects of imperious plenary powers and suggest ways to solve them. Methods. A special formal-logical method has been applied in order to study the issue f compliance with the requirements of the principle of legal certainty in the normative consolidation of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers. By means of such general theoretical methods as analysis, synthesis, generalization and modelling, legislative errors in establishing a range of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim have been identified, and suggestions to correct them have been made. Results. The article analyses the provisions of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine in terms of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers. Based on the analysis of scientific approaches and case law, the issue of whether the administrative court and all the parties of court proceedings (the plaintiff, the defendant, the third parties and the individuals granted by law to appeal to the court in the interests of others) are actual right holders to initiate the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers has been investigated. Conclusions. It has been proven that the legislator, contrary to the principle of legal certainty, does not provide for all the subjects of initiating the issue of securing an administrative claim. It has been noted that there is a collision between the provisions of part 1 and part 2 of art. 150 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine. This collision lies in the fact that part 1 of this article imperatively establishes that the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim are exclusively the parties of court proceedings and the administrative court, whereas part 2 also refers to the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim the individual who has not acquired the procedural status of a party of court proceedings (the plaintiff) yet, although may acquire it. It has been substantiated that the legislator, referring the defendant and the third parties who do not declare independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute on the part of the defendant as parties of court proceedings to the subjects of initiating the issue of securing an administrative claim, did not take into account the legal nature of this procedural institution. It has been substantiated that giving the administrative court the right to secure a claim on its own initiative corresponds to the specifics of administrative proceedings. It has been proposed to amend part 1 of art. 150 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine in order to comprehensively consolidate the range of subjects of initiation of the issue of securing a claim, which in turn will improve the procedure for implementing the institution of securing an administrative claim.","PeriodicalId":7222,"journal":{"name":"Administrative law and process","volume":"112 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative law and process","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17721/2227-796x.2022.1.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose. The objective of the article is to identify problems related to the regulatory establishment of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts (individual acts or normative legal acts) of subjects of imperious plenary powers and suggest ways to solve them. Methods. A special formal-logical method has been applied in order to study the issue f compliance with the requirements of the principle of legal certainty in the normative consolidation of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers. By means of such general theoretical methods as analysis, synthesis, generalization and modelling, legislative errors in establishing a range of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim have been identified, and suggestions to correct them have been made. Results. The article analyses the provisions of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine in terms of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers. Based on the analysis of scientific approaches and case law, the issue of whether the administrative court and all the parties of court proceedings (the plaintiff, the defendant, the third parties and the individuals granted by law to appeal to the court in the interests of others) are actual right holders to initiate the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers has been investigated. Conclusions. It has been proven that the legislator, contrary to the principle of legal certainty, does not provide for all the subjects of initiating the issue of securing an administrative claim. It has been noted that there is a collision between the provisions of part 1 and part 2 of art. 150 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine. This collision lies in the fact that part 1 of this article imperatively establishes that the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim are exclusively the parties of court proceedings and the administrative court, whereas part 2 also refers to the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim the individual who has not acquired the procedural status of a party of court proceedings (the plaintiff) yet, although may acquire it. It has been substantiated that the legislator, referring the defendant and the third parties who do not declare independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute on the part of the defendant as parties of court proceedings to the subjects of initiating the issue of securing an administrative claim, did not take into account the legal nature of this procedural institution. It has been substantiated that giving the administrative court the right to secure a claim on its own initiative corresponds to the specifics of administrative proceedings. It has been proposed to amend part 1 of art. 150 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine in order to comprehensively consolidate the range of subjects of initiation of the issue of securing a claim, which in turn will improve the procedure for implementing the institution of securing an administrative claim.
通过中止个人行为或规范性法律行为来发起索赔问题的主体
目的。本文的目的是确定与通过中止拥有绝对绝对权力的主体的行为(个人行为或规范性法律行为)来发起确保索赔问题的主体的监管设置有关的问题,并提出解决这些问题的方法。方法。采用一种特殊的形式逻辑方法来研究在通过暂停专横的全体权力主体的行为来发起确保索赔的问题的主体的规范性巩固中遵守法律确定性原则要求的问题。通过分析、综合、概括和建模等一般理论方法,确定了在确定一系列发起索赔问题的主体方面的立法错误,并提出了纠正这些错误的建议。结果。本文分析了乌克兰《行政诉讼法典》中关于通过中止专横的全权主体的行为来提起索赔问题的规定。在科学方法和判例法分析的基础上,对行政法院和法院诉讼的所有当事人(原告、被告、第三人和法律授予的为他人利益向法院上诉的个人)是否为发起通过中止僭主权力主体的行为来确保索赔问题的实际权利人进行了研究。结论。事实证明,立法者违背了法律确定性原则,没有规定发起确保行政请求问题的所有主体。有人指出,第1部分和第2部分的规定之间存在冲突。乌克兰行政诉讼法典第150条。这一冲突在于,本条第1部分强制性地确立了发起索赔担保问题的主体仅是法院诉讼的当事人和行政法院,而第2部分也提到了发起索赔担保问题的主体,即尚未获得法院诉讼当事人(原告)的诉讼地位,尽管可能获得诉讼地位。事实证明,立法者将被告和未就被告作为法院诉讼当事人的争议主体提出独立索赔的第三方,指为发起确保行政索赔问题的主体,没有考虑到这一程序制度的法律性质。事实证明,赋予行政法院主动提出索赔的权利符合行政诉讼的具体情况。有人建议修订第1部分。《乌克兰行政诉讼法典》第150条,以便全面巩固提起索赔问题的主体范围,这反过来将改进执行行政索赔制度的程序。
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
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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