Dealing With Common Complaints in Execution Proceedings in Administration

Wojciech M. Hrynicki
{"title":"Dealing With Common Complaints in Execution Proceedings in Administration","authors":"Wojciech M. Hrynicki","doi":"10.26399/iusnovum.v16.1.2022.5-w.m.hrynicki","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary The article discusses the issue of priority of jurisdiction proceedings over simplified complaint proceedings in enforcement proceedings in administration. The author notes that allegations included in common complaints may be similar to those included in the legal remedies available to the obliged (and other participants) in the enforcement proceedings in administration. At the same time, the author argues that filing a common complaint – instead of an appropriate legal remedy in the enforcement proceedings in administration – does not cause an automatic entitlement on the part of the body with general jurisdiction over complaints to deal with such a complaint outside the pending enforcement proceedings in administration. On the contrary, the regulations in force oblige to handle such a complaint within the framework of pending enforcement proceedings and this usually takes place, given the allegations of the complaint, within the framework of the initiated procedure of the appropriate legal remedy in these proceedings. The author emphasises that the primacy of jurisdiction proceedings means that the consideration and settlement of common complaints containing allegations against the conducted enforcement proceedings by a body of general jurisdiction for common complaints, instead of by an enforcement body (sometimes a supervisory body), should be qualified as consideration of a complaint by a body not competent in the case.","PeriodicalId":33501,"journal":{"name":"Ius Novum","volume":"16 1","pages":"83 - 101"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ius Novum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26399/iusnovum.v16.1.2022.5-w.m.hrynicki","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

Summary The article discusses the issue of priority of jurisdiction proceedings over simplified complaint proceedings in enforcement proceedings in administration. The author notes that allegations included in common complaints may be similar to those included in the legal remedies available to the obliged (and other participants) in the enforcement proceedings in administration. At the same time, the author argues that filing a common complaint – instead of an appropriate legal remedy in the enforcement proceedings in administration – does not cause an automatic entitlement on the part of the body with general jurisdiction over complaints to deal with such a complaint outside the pending enforcement proceedings in administration. On the contrary, the regulations in force oblige to handle such a complaint within the framework of pending enforcement proceedings and this usually takes place, given the allegations of the complaint, within the framework of the initiated procedure of the appropriate legal remedy in these proceedings. The author emphasises that the primacy of jurisdiction proceedings means that the consideration and settlement of common complaints containing allegations against the conducted enforcement proceedings by a body of general jurisdiction for common complaints, instead of by an enforcement body (sometimes a supervisory body), should be qualified as consideration of a complaint by a body not competent in the case.
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
行政执行程序中常见投诉的处理
摘要本文讨论了行政强制执行程序中管辖权程序优先于简化申诉程序的问题。提交人指出,常见申诉中的指控可能与行政强制执行程序中义务人(和其他参与者)可获得的法律补救措施中的指控相似。同时,提交人辩称,提出共同申诉——而不是在行政强制执行程序中采取适当的法律补救措施——并不会导致对申诉具有一般管辖权的机构自动有权在行政强制程序未决之外处理此类申诉。相反,现行条例规定必须在未决执行程序的框架内处理此类申诉,鉴于申诉的指控,这种情况通常在这些程序中适当法律补救的启动程序框架内发生。提交人强调,管辖权程序的首要地位意味着,由对普通申诉具有一般管辖权的机构而不是执行机构(有时是监督机构)审议和解决包含对所进行的执行程序的指控的普通申诉,应被限定为对该案件没有管辖权的机构的投诉进行审议。
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
9
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Paradox of Democratic Strengthening: Criminalisation of Political Terrorism as a Legal Discrediting Mechanism The Attack on the Protected Legal Interest: A Criminalisation Principle and an Element of the Criminal Offence? Amendment to the Rights and Obligations of a Journalist in Act: Press Law from the Perspective of Conscience Clause Key Elements of the Criminal Law Conflict System, with Special Reference to Spanish Criminal Law On the Concept of an Appellate Measure in a Criminal Proceeding
×
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