Browsing by Author "Ciesielska, Agnieszka"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Kompetencja sądu administracyjnego do uznania w wyroku uprawnienia lub obowiązku wynikających z przepisów prawa(Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, 2019) Ciesielska, AgnieszkaThe purpose of the article is to present the competence of the administrative court indicated in Article 146 § 2 of the Act of 30 August 2002 – the Law on proceedings before administrative courts (LPAC). In accordance with this provision, in matters concerning complaints against an Act or an action related to public administration referred to in Article 3 § 2 point 4 of the LPAC, the court may recognize in its judgment a right or an obligation arising from the provisions of law and may issue a relevant decision in the matter if it first annuls the act or declares that the action is with no legal effect pursuant to Article 146 § 1 of the LPAC. It must be emphasized however, that Article 146 § 2 of the LPAC is not an independent basis for issuing a judgment and the doctrine often presents differing views. It should be assumed that the court may recognize the right or the obligation of an individual that arises from the provisions of law if the nature of the case permits doing so and when the facts and the legal framework of the case do not raise reasonable doubts. Unfortunately, judicial case studies show that this possibility is rarely used. Furthermore, courts encounter numerous problems in applying Article 146 § 2 of the LPAC, most probably because of the huge controversy regarding this procedural institution. Firstly, there is no consensus as to the function of the judicial decision based on the provision in question, and the interpretation of its facultative nature is also problematic. In the author’s opinion administrative courts should use the competence referred to in Article 146 § 2 of the LPAC more frequently. Such a change of practice would increase the effectiveness of judicial review of public administration as well as will enhance the level of protection of individual rights. The article also contains some interesting examples of the application of Article 146 § 2 of the LPAC.Item Z problematyki zakazu reformationis in peius w postępowaniu sądowoadministracyjnym(Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, 2017) Ciesielska, AgnieszkaThe principle of prohibition of reformatio in peius is established in Article 134 § 2 of the Law on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts. According to this provision the administrative court is not allowed to issue a decision to the detriment of the complainant. A judgment adverse to the complainant can be exceptionally issued but only if the court fi nds a violation of the law resulting in the annulment of the challenged act or action. This principle is a procedural institution which ensures that the complainant’s situation will not deteriorate due to the decision of the administrative court. There are many interpretative doubts concerning the prohibition of reformatio in peius in the doctrine and the jurisdiction of the administrative courts. This is because administrative courts very rarely issue a decision on the merits. Decisions of administrative courts are basically of cassation nature. When the administrative court allows a complaint, the contested act is generally eliminated from the system of law and the case is returned for re-examination by the public administrative authority. It is therefore very diffi cult to determine the content of the prohibition of reformatio in peius in administrative court proceedings and in practice the prohibition of a change for the worse is not a real guarantee of the protection of the interests of the complainant. In the author’s opinion, the way of approaching the mechanism of application of the prohibition of reformatio in peius by the administrative courts needs to be changed. And yet, a signifi cant improvement in the eff ectiveness of the protection against the worsening of the complainant’s legal situation will only be possible through the introduction of a new legal regulation restricting the jurisdiction of public administrative authority, which will reconsider the case after the cassation judgment issued by the administrative court.