Remonstrance Against Decisions Made by Central Administrative Bodies in the Czech Republic

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14220%2F14%3A00073688" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14220/14:00073688 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://www.fu.uni-lj.si/en/publishing-center/international-public-administration-review/current-issue/" target="_blank" >http://www.fu.uni-lj.si/en/publishing-center/international-public-administration-review/current-issue/</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Remonstrance Against Decisions Made by Central Administrative Bodies in the Czech Republic

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The remonstrance is traditional standard (ordinary) remedial measure which can be (only) applied after the first instance decision has been issued by central administrative body. The article is heading to verify the hypothesis whether the remonstrance does reflect the principle of two instances in entirety. As the finding of the research it can be pointed out that the remonstrance represents relative exclusion of the principle of two instances, which is applied only in a modified form, as the remonstrance is not decided by any higher, independent administrative authority, but by the identical central administrative body, namely by its head, not by its remonstrance committee, which issues ?only? recommendations/advices. We concluded that possible solutions are either transformation remonstrance committees into administrative bodies/tribunals, or rules providing the central administrative bodies do not make first instance decisions.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Remonstrance Against Decisions Made by Central Administrative Bodies in the Czech Republic

Popis výsledku anglicky

The remonstrance is traditional standard (ordinary) remedial measure which can be (only) applied after the first instance decision has been issued by central administrative body. The article is heading to verify the hypothesis whether the remonstrance does reflect the principle of two instances in entirety. As the finding of the research it can be pointed out that the remonstrance represents relative exclusion of the principle of two instances, which is applied only in a modified form, as the remonstrance is not decided by any higher, independent administrative authority, but by the identical central administrative body, namely by its head, not by its remonstrance committee, which issues ?only? recommendations/advices. We concluded that possible solutions are either transformation remonstrance committees into administrative bodies/tribunals, or rules providing the central administrative bodies do not make first instance decisions.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

AG - Právní vědy

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA13-30730S" target="_blank" >GA13-30730S: Prostředky ochrany subjektivních práv ve veřejné správě, jejich systém a efektivnost</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2014

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

International Public Administration Review

ISSN

2335-3414

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

12

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

2-3

Stát vydavatele periodika

SI - Slovinská republika

Počet stran výsledku

20

Strana od-do

123-142

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—