This book is about judicial review of public administration. Many have regarded this to divide European legal orders, with judicial review of administrative action in the general courts or specialized administrative courts, or with different distance from the executive. There has been
considerably less of comparison of the basic procedural and substantive principles. The comparative study in this book of procedural fairness and propriety in the courts reveals not only differences but also some common and connecting elements, in a 'common core' perspective.
The book is divided into four parts. The first explains the nature and purpose of a comparison to understand the relevance and significance of commonality and diversity between the legal systems of Europe, and which considers other legal systems which are distant and distinct from Europe, such as
China and Latin America. The second part contains an overview of the systems of judicial review in these legal orders. The third part, which is the heart of the 'common core' method, contains both a set of hypothetical cases and the solutions, according to the experts of the legal systems selected
for our comparison, to the cases. The fourth part serves to examine the answers in comparative terms to ascertain not so much whether a 'common core' exists, but how it is shaped and evolves, also in response to the influence of supranational legal orders as the European Union and the Council of
Europe.
| Detailed Contents |
|
xiii | |
|
|
|
xxv | |
|
|
|
xxix | |
|
I GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND COMPARATIVE STUDIES |
|
|
|
1 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review: A `Common Core' Research |
|
|
3 | (18) |
|
|
|
|
|
2 The Common Core of European Administrative Laws and the Pan-European General Principles of Good Administration |
|
|
21 | (16) |
|
|
|
II THE LEGAL SYSTEMS SELECTED FOR COMPARISON: PRINCIPLES AND REMEDIES |
|
|
|
3 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Austria |
|
|
37 | (4) |
|
|
|
4 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Belgium |
|
|
41 | (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in China |
|
|
44 | (3) |
|
|
|
6 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in the European Union |
|
|
47 | (3) |
|
|
|
7 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in France |
|
|
50 | (3) |
|
|
|
8 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Germany |
|
|
53 | (6) |
|
|
|
9 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Hungary |
|
|
59 | (3) |
|
|
|
10 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Italy |
|
|
62 | (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
11 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Latin America |
|
|
65 | (4) |
|
|
|
12 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Lithuania |
|
|
69 | (3) |
|
|
|
13 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Spain |
|
|
72 | (3) |
|
|
|
14 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Switzerland |
|
|
75 | (4) |
|
|
|
15 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in Ukraine |
|
|
79 | (3) |
|
|
|
16 Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review in the United Kingdom |
|
|
82 | (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89 | (206) |
|
|
|
89 | (5) |
|
II Case 1---Dismissing a Civil Servant Without Due Process of Law |
|
|
94 | (18) |
|
III Case 2---The Unwelcome Asylum Seeker |
|
|
112 | (23) |
|
IV Case 3---Deciding on a Protected Building Without Consulting Experts |
|
|
135 | (16) |
|
V Case 4---An Opaque Administrative Sanctions Procedure |
|
|
151 | (23) |
|
VI Case 5---An Administrative `Detention' Without Reasons |
|
|
174 | (18) |
|
VII Case 6--- Tanto and the Adequate' Reasons for Censorship |
|
|
192 | (20) |
|
VIII Case 7---Reconsidering things: Administrative Orders and Posthumous Reasons |
|
|
212 | (16) |
|
IX Case 8---The Industry Representative Who Was Not Consulted |
|
|
228 | (21) |
|
X Case 9---Citizens and Environmental Impact Assessment |
|
|
249 | (25) |
|
XI Case 10---Cutting Services: The Duty of Public Consultation |
|
|
274 | (21) |
|
|
|
|
18 EU Countries and the UK |
|
|
295 | (12) |
|
|
|
19 European Union Member States and Other European Countries |
|
|
307 | (9) |
|
|
|
20 Judicial Review of Administrative Action: Europe and Latin America |
|
|
316 | (10) |
|
|
|
21 Administrative Law and the Chinese Legal System: Some Issues on Judicial Review of Administration Activity |
|
|
326 | (13) |
|
|
|
22 Judicial Oversight of Procedural Fairness and Propriety in Europe: Diversity Within Commonality |
|
|
339 | (28) |
|
|
| Selected Bibliography |
|
367 | (4) |
| Index |
|
371 | |
Giacinto della Cananea is a professor and leading authority on EU administrative law and comparative administrative law. His publications include five monographs, 20 edited volumes, and over 150 articles, book chapters, and comments to judicial decisions on national and EU administrative law, global administrative law, and public finances. He is a co-ordinator of ReNEUAL, and a member of the European Group of Public Law, the European Constitutional Law Network, the Societas Juris Public Europei, and the Dornburg Group of Administrative Law.
Mads Andenas is a professor of law at University of Oslo, and the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London. He is also a barrister at Brick Court Chambers in London. He is the former President-Rapporteur, United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (2009-15); Director, The British Institute of International and Comparative Law (1999-2006); and Director, Centre of European law, King's College, University of London (1991-99). Mads has held positions as Senior Fellow, Oxford Institute of European and Comparative Law (2000-2010); Chaire Vincent Wright at Sciences-Po (2011-12); Visiting Professor at Sapienza Università di Roma; and Peter Ellinger Visiting Professor at University of Singapore (2019-20). He is the General Editor of the ICLQ and the EBLR. In 2011, he received the Don Pino Puglisi Prize for his human rights work. He is on the Panel of Arbitrators maintained by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes.
Lisainfo e-raamatute kohta