Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

Ten serwis zostanie wyłączony 2025-02-11.

Nowa wersja platformy, zawierająca wyłącznie zasoby pełnotekstowe, jest już dostępna.
Przejdź na https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Ograniczanie wyników

2 Szafrańska W.

Znaleziono wyników: 2

Liczba wyników na stronie

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Sortuj według:

Ogranicz wyniki do:

Vom Enumerationsprinzip zur Generalklausel in der Verwaltungsgerichtsbarkeit: Deutschland und Polen im Rechtsvergleich

100%

Szafrańska W.

nr 2

295-315

In every state that has decided to introduce to its legal system the oversight of public administration by an administrative judiciary, one of the most crucial points appears to be the question of regulating the scope of such control. The creation of administrative courts itself does not guarantee proper and full protection of citizens against the actions of the authority. As is shown by the history of statutes of control, the legislator can de facto freely influence the judges in this matter by introducing either the so-called enumeration clause or a general clause. Both aforementioned ways of determining the scope of contesting are derived from German legislation, in which Rudolf von Gneist’s and Otto Bähr’s concepts were „competing” over the years. The first saw the administrative judiciary mainly as an institution to protect the objective law order. For the latter, who put the individual’s rights first, it was pivotal that the administra- tive judiciary should provide full protection of citizens against the actions of the executive power. And it was the second of the two theories that led to a gradual disappearance of determining the object of protection in statutes regarding administrative court procedures by listing the categories of affairs liable to control (enumeration) with general clauses allowing submission of conceivably all activity of public administration to the cognizance of the courts. The profound influence of ideas proposed by German administrative law theorists on con- temporary views of the administrative judiciary’s role in a democratic state following principles of the rule of law is clearly visible in an analysis of Polish regulations applying to administrative court proceedings. Earlier, in the 1980 Supreme Administrative Court Act, the legislator ex- cluded the „inconvenient” administrative cases by enumerations; this limitation presently seems impossible. This article presents how the regulations regarding the scope of control of the administrative judiciary in Poland and Germany were changing over the years. The comparative method was mainly aimed at showing the changing approach to the judicial oversight of public administra- tion. The ideas adopted from our western neighbors were influential in the theory of administra- tive law not only in Poland, but also in Europe.

Limitation of the principle of openness in Polish judicial-administrative proceedings during the pandemic and the standards of a fair hearing: the reasons for possible complaints brought before the European Court of Human Rights

100%

Szafrańska W.

2022

tom 91

368-386

Along with the development of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the Polish legislator, by introducing restrictions on the principle of openness in administrative court proceedings, finally decided to exclude the possibility of conducting hearings in court buildings. Currently, it is only possible to proceed in closed session or in the form of a remote hearing – i.e. with the use of technical devices enabling simultaneous direct transmission of vision and sound. The aim of the article is to assess the “Covid regulations” introduced into the Polish legal system, limiting the right of the parties to open hearing of a case pending before administrative courts in terms of the regulations on the right to a fair trial contained in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.