ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: TOWARDS A COMMON MODEL OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE

Estanislao Arana García
{"title":"ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: TOWARDS A COMMON MODEL OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE","authors":"Estanislao Arana García","doi":"10.17721/2227-796x.2019.2.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose. The aim of this paper is to analyse the activity of the European agencies as a mechanism of control prior to the judicial review. This procedure is carried out by independent and impartial administrative tribunals. This model supposes to create specialized administrative organs that solve conflicts previous to the judicial procedure. The “agencies model” is mainly used in western countries with legal Anglo-Saxon reminiscences. In this paper we analyze the importance of these agencies and its possibilities for improvement in the near future. Method. To achieve this goal it is necessary to: 1) analysis the creative solutions of the agencies courts; 2) verify the performance of agencies through the information provided by themselves; 3) discuss the judicial decisions from a scientific perspective. This process has been implemented through direct contact with experts and professional actively involved at these European administrative courts. Results. EU law is haphazardly creating a system of administrative review that is in many cases a pre-condition to judicial review. This system is most evidently manifesting itself in the application of EU law by administrative agencies. For this purpose, some of the EU’s most important agencies have created specialised bodies known as boards of appeal. These objective and independent bodies have the power to review the decisions of the agency they form part on based on both questions of law and fact. The paper aims to establish a critical vision of the role that new judicial forms are developing and the importance of to reach a specialized criterion for solving technically increasingly complex issues. Conclusions. The board-of-appeal model has proven a successful one as it offers parties a low-cost and effective way of having their complaints resolved without having to go to the European Union Court of Justice. Lastly, there appears to be a need for the European Union to, as it is currently doing with administrative procedure, establish a common set of rules for this emerging remedy for reviewing European administrative acts.","PeriodicalId":7222,"journal":{"name":"Administrative law and process","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","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.2019.2.06","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 aim of this paper is to analyse the activity of the European agencies as a mechanism of control prior to the judicial review. This procedure is carried out by independent and impartial administrative tribunals. This model supposes to create specialized administrative organs that solve conflicts previous to the judicial procedure. The “agencies model” is mainly used in western countries with legal Anglo-Saxon reminiscences. In this paper we analyze the importance of these agencies and its possibilities for improvement in the near future. Method. To achieve this goal it is necessary to: 1) analysis the creative solutions of the agencies courts; 2) verify the performance of agencies through the information provided by themselves; 3) discuss the judicial decisions from a scientific perspective. This process has been implemented through direct contact with experts and professional actively involved at these European administrative courts. Results. EU law is haphazardly creating a system of administrative review that is in many cases a pre-condition to judicial review. This system is most evidently manifesting itself in the application of EU law by administrative agencies. For this purpose, some of the EU’s most important agencies have created specialised bodies known as boards of appeal. These objective and independent bodies have the power to review the decisions of the agency they form part on based on both questions of law and fact. The paper aims to establish a critical vision of the role that new judicial forms are developing and the importance of to reach a specialized criterion for solving technically increasingly complex issues. Conclusions. The board-of-appeal model has proven a successful one as it offers parties a low-cost and effective way of having their complaints resolved without having to go to the European Union Court of Justice. Lastly, there appears to be a need for the European Union to, as it is currently doing with administrative procedure, establish a common set of rules for this emerging remedy for reviewing European administrative acts.
欧洲联盟的行政上诉:迈向行政司法的共同模式
目的。本文的目的是分析欧洲机构的活动作为司法审查之前的控制机制。这一程序由独立和公正的行政法庭执行。该模式设想在司法程序之前建立专门的行政机关来解决冲突。“代理模式”主要在西方国家使用,具有法律上的盎格鲁-撒克逊回忆。本文分析了这些机构的重要性以及在不久的将来改进的可能性。为了实现这一目标,有必要:1)分析机构法院的创造性解决方案;2)通过自身提供的信息对代理机构的履约情况进行核实;3)从科学的角度讨论司法判决。这一过程是通过与这些欧洲行政法院积极参与的专家和专业人员直接接触来实施的。欧盟法律无意中创造了一个行政审查制度,在许多情况下,这是司法审查的先决条件。这一制度最明显地体现在行政机关对欧盟法律的适用上。为此,欧盟一些最重要的机构设立了专门的机构,即上诉委员会。这些客观和独立的机构有权根据法律和事实问题审查它们组成部分的机构的决定。本文旨在对新司法形式正在发展的作用以及为解决技术上日益复杂的问题达成专门标准的重要性建立一种批判性的看法。上诉委员会模式已被证明是一种成功的模式,因为它为各方提供了一种低成本和有效的方式来解决他们的投诉,而不必诉诸欧洲联盟法院。最后,欧洲联盟似乎有必要象它目前在行政程序方面所做的那样,为审查欧洲行政行为的这种新出现的补救办法制订一套共同规则。
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