{"title":"多利益相关者诉讼中行政法院诉讼的参与人","authors":"Jakub Polanowski","doi":"10.17951/ppa.2020.3.123-143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is conceptual in nature and addresses the application of the rules on the participation of participants in administrative court proceedings. The main thesis of the paper is based on the statement that a person who, as a party to administrative proceedings, was notified, pursuant to Art. 49a of the Administrative Procedure Code, of the activities of an authority by public announcement, may become a participant in administrative court proceedings after fulfilling the condition specified in Art. 33 § 1a of the Law on Administrative Courts Proceedings. The subsidiary thesis is that reasons of procedural efficiency require the adoption of such a limitation of the rights of the designated entities that will not infringe the essence of their right to a court and will not impede the exercise of that right by the parties and other participants to the proceedings. The purpose of this paper is to provide that Art. 49a of the Code of Administrative Procedure is one of the “special provisions” referred to in Art. 33 § 1a of the Law on Administrative Courts Proceedings. The reasoning adopted is based on the assumption that the interpretation of the above provisions should take into account both the requirements arising from the right of access to court and the right to be heard without unreasonable delay and the need to minimise the costs of proceedings. The described issue, based on national research, is of significant importance for practice and have not yet been discussed in more detail in the doctrine.","PeriodicalId":298732,"journal":{"name":"Przegląd Prawa Administracyjnego","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Participants in Administrative Court Proceedings in Multi-Stakeholder Proceedings\",\"authors\":\"Jakub Polanowski\",\"doi\":\"10.17951/ppa.2020.3.123-143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article is conceptual in nature and addresses the application of the rules on the participation of participants in administrative court proceedings. The main thesis of the paper is based on the statement that a person who, as a party to administrative proceedings, was notified, pursuant to Art. 49a of the Administrative Procedure Code, of the activities of an authority by public announcement, may become a participant in administrative court proceedings after fulfilling the condition specified in Art. 33 § 1a of the Law on Administrative Courts Proceedings. The subsidiary thesis is that reasons of procedural efficiency require the adoption of such a limitation of the rights of the designated entities that will not infringe the essence of their right to a court and will not impede the exercise of that right by the parties and other participants to the proceedings. The purpose of this paper is to provide that Art. 49a of the Code of Administrative Procedure is one of the “special provisions” referred to in Art. 33 § 1a of the Law on Administrative Courts Proceedings. The reasoning adopted is based on the assumption that the interpretation of the above provisions should take into account both the requirements arising from the right of access to court and the right to be heard without unreasonable delay and the need to minimise the costs of proceedings. The described issue, based on national research, is of significant importance for practice and have not yet been discussed in more detail in the doctrine.\",\"PeriodicalId\":298732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Przegląd Prawa Administracyjnego\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Przegląd Prawa Administracyjnego\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17951/ppa.2020.3.123-143\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przegląd Prawa Administracyjnego","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17951/ppa.2020.3.123-143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Participants in Administrative Court Proceedings in Multi-Stakeholder Proceedings
This article is conceptual in nature and addresses the application of the rules on the participation of participants in administrative court proceedings. The main thesis of the paper is based on the statement that a person who, as a party to administrative proceedings, was notified, pursuant to Art. 49a of the Administrative Procedure Code, of the activities of an authority by public announcement, may become a participant in administrative court proceedings after fulfilling the condition specified in Art. 33 § 1a of the Law on Administrative Courts Proceedings. The subsidiary thesis is that reasons of procedural efficiency require the adoption of such a limitation of the rights of the designated entities that will not infringe the essence of their right to a court and will not impede the exercise of that right by the parties and other participants to the proceedings. The purpose of this paper is to provide that Art. 49a of the Code of Administrative Procedure is one of the “special provisions” referred to in Art. 33 § 1a of the Law on Administrative Courts Proceedings. The reasoning adopted is based on the assumption that the interpretation of the above provisions should take into account both the requirements arising from the right of access to court and the right to be heard without unreasonable delay and the need to minimise the costs of proceedings. The described issue, based on national research, is of significant importance for practice and have not yet been discussed in more detail in the doctrine.