The principles of issuing a crucial decision (selected problems)

Łukasz Dubiński
{"title":"The principles of issuing a crucial decision (selected problems)","authors":"Łukasz Dubiński","doi":"10.31743/sp.14978","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The erection and commissioning of a nuclear power plant requires a number of administrative pro­cedures. At the same time, in the majority of cases, it concerns proceedings that are mainly regulated outside the provisions on nuclear energy, and thus have already been discussed many times in the doctrine (e.g. cases regarding the building permit). Against the background of the above, the procedure for issuing a crucial decision stands out. This is because this decision is not present outside the regulations concerning nuclear energy. However, it should be noted that the decision in question is of key importance as far as the possibility of starting the construction and operation of nuclear power is concerned. Thus it is surprising that the manner in which this ruling is regulated does not allow for determining such basic issues as the character of the crucial decision or the premises for issuing it. The goal of this study is to solve these dilemmas. The adopted research method is the dogmatic and legal method. On the basis of the conducted analysis, it was established that in the current legal status, the crucial decision is of a binding nature, and the premises for its issuance are included in Article 22 Section 3 of the Act of 29 June 2011 on preparing and implementing investments in the field of nuclear power facilities and accompanying investments. It should be added that the presented results of the interpretative analysis are inconsistent with the position of the doctrine. In the literature, it is assumed that the crucial decision has a discretionary (‘political’) character. Moreover, the wording of the aforementioned act does not specify the conditions for issuing a crucial decision. Instead, it is suggested to look for them within the so-called legislative materials.","PeriodicalId":22051,"journal":{"name":"Studia Prawnicze KUL","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Prawnicze KUL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31743/sp.14978","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The erection and commissioning of a nuclear power plant requires a number of administrative pro­cedures. At the same time, in the majority of cases, it concerns proceedings that are mainly regulated outside the provisions on nuclear energy, and thus have already been discussed many times in the doctrine (e.g. cases regarding the building permit). Against the background of the above, the procedure for issuing a crucial decision stands out. This is because this decision is not present outside the regulations concerning nuclear energy. However, it should be noted that the decision in question is of key importance as far as the possibility of starting the construction and operation of nuclear power is concerned. Thus it is surprising that the manner in which this ruling is regulated does not allow for determining such basic issues as the character of the crucial decision or the premises for issuing it. The goal of this study is to solve these dilemmas. The adopted research method is the dogmatic and legal method. On the basis of the conducted analysis, it was established that in the current legal status, the crucial decision is of a binding nature, and the premises for its issuance are included in Article 22 Section 3 of the Act of 29 June 2011 on preparing and implementing investments in the field of nuclear power facilities and accompanying investments. It should be added that the presented results of the interpretative analysis are inconsistent with the position of the doctrine. In the literature, it is assumed that the crucial decision has a discretionary (‘political’) character. Moreover, the wording of the aforementioned act does not specify the conditions for issuing a crucial decision. Instead, it is suggested to look for them within the so-called legislative materials.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作出关键决定的原则(选定的问题)
核电站的安装和调试需要办理一些行政手续。同时,在大多数情况下,它所涉及的程序主要是在关于核能的规定之外管制的,因此已经在理论中讨论过多次(例如关于建筑许可证的情况)。在上述背景下,作出一项关键决定的程序显得尤为突出。这是因为这一决定并不存在于有关核能的规定之外。然而,应该指出的是,就开始建设和运行核电的可能性而言,所讨论的决定是至关重要的。因此,令人惊讶的是,管理这项裁决的方式不允许确定诸如关键决定的性质或发布决定的前提等基本问题。本研究的目的就是要解决这些困境。所采用的研究方法是教条法和法理法。根据所进行的分析,确定在目前的法律地位下,该关键决定具有约束力,其发布的前提包括2011年6月29日关于准备和实施核电设施领域投资及相关投资的法案第22条第3节。应当补充的是,解释性分析提出的结果与该学说的立场不一致。在文献中,假设关键决策具有自由裁量(“政治”)特征。此外,上述法案的措辞并没有具体说明作出关键决定的条件。相反,建议在所谓的立法材料中寻找它们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Wpływ implementacji dyrektywy 2019/771 (SDG) na spójność regulacji prawa cywilnego dotyczących odpowiedzialności sprzedawcy w stosunku do konsumenta i innych kupujących za wady rzeczy Diariusz. Kalendarium ważniejszych wydarzeń naukowych z udziałem pracowników Wydziału Prawa, Prawa Kanonicznego i Administracji KUL lipiec – wrzesień 2023 r. Model prawny odpowiedzialności za naruszenie dyscypliny finansów publicznych w Polsce Witold Wołodkiewicz, Maria Zabłocka, "Prawo rzymskie. Instytucje", wyd. 7 poprawione i rozszerzone, C.H. Beck, Warszawa 2023 Uzasadnienie kryminalizacji znieważenia wartości państwowych z perspektywy informacyjnych zagrożeń bezpieczeństwa narodowego
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1