可以参与行政法院关于获取公共信息的诉讼的一群人。最高行政法院2016年11月4日的判决,I OSK 1372/15

Aleksander Kwaśniak
{"title":"可以参与行政法院关于获取公共信息的诉讼的一群人。最高行政法院2016年11月4日的判决,I OSK 1372/15","authors":"Aleksander Kwaśniak","doi":"10.16926/gea.2022.01.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the cassation appeal of the First President of the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw, revoking the decision to refuse to sharing the public information. The decision concerned the refusal to sharing information about the civil law contracts concluded by the Supreme Court, due to the protection of personal data and the privacy of natural persons. An important issue in the present case is the possibility of participation in the proceedings of persons whose personal data relates to the application. The dogmatic analysis allows to assume that while such persons cannot participate in the public information sharing procedure, their participation as participants in administrative court proceedings is possible, based on Art. 33 § 2 of the Law on Administrative Court Procedure. The protection of privacy is in the legal interest of these people, even on the basis of Art. 47 of the Constitution.","PeriodicalId":166701,"journal":{"name":"Gubernaculum et Administratio","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A group of people who can participate in administrative court proceedings regarding access to public information. The gloss approval to the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 4 November 2016, I OSK 1372/15\",\"authors\":\"Aleksander Kwaśniak\",\"doi\":\"10.16926/gea.2022.01.07\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the cassation appeal of the First President of the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw, revoking the decision to refuse to sharing the public information. The decision concerned the refusal to sharing information about the civil law contracts concluded by the Supreme Court, due to the protection of personal data and the privacy of natural persons. An important issue in the present case is the possibility of participation in the proceedings of persons whose personal data relates to the application. The dogmatic analysis allows to assume that while such persons cannot participate in the public information sharing procedure, their participation as participants in administrative court proceedings is possible, based on Art. 33 § 2 of the Law on Administrative Court Procedure. The protection of privacy is in the legal interest of these people, even on the basis of Art. 47 of the Constitution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":166701,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gubernaculum et Administratio\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gubernaculum et Administratio\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.16926/gea.2022.01.07\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gubernaculum et Administratio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16926/gea.2022.01.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最高行政法院驳回了最高法院第一院长对华沙省行政法院判决的撤销上诉,撤销了拒绝分享公共信息的决定。该决定涉及由于保护个人数据和自然人隐私而拒绝分享最高法院缔结的民法合同的信息。本案的一个重要问题是其个人资料与申请有关的人士参与诉讼的可能性。教条式分析允许假设,虽然这些人不能参与公共信息共享程序,但根据《行政法院程序法》第33条第2款,他们作为参与者参与行政法院诉讼是可能的。即使根据《宪法》第47条,保护隐私也符合这些人的法律利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A group of people who can participate in administrative court proceedings regarding access to public information. The gloss approval to the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 4 November 2016, I OSK 1372/15
The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the cassation appeal of the First President of the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw, revoking the decision to refuse to sharing the public information. The decision concerned the refusal to sharing information about the civil law contracts concluded by the Supreme Court, due to the protection of personal data and the privacy of natural persons. An important issue in the present case is the possibility of participation in the proceedings of persons whose personal data relates to the application. The dogmatic analysis allows to assume that while such persons cannot participate in the public information sharing procedure, their participation as participants in administrative court proceedings is possible, based on Art. 33 § 2 of the Law on Administrative Court Procedure. The protection of privacy is in the legal interest of these people, even on the basis of Art. 47 of the Constitution.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sprawozdanie z Ogólnopolskiej Konferencji Naukowej w ramach XVII Zjazdu Kół Naukowych Prawa Konstytucyjnego pt. „Parlamentaryzm w ujęciu prawnym, historycznym i ekonomicznym” A few reflections on the understanding of modern public administration Complaints about irregularities in the electoral register and the voter list – selected remarks against the background of jurisprudence The Idea of Justice in Historiosophy of Antiquity Historiosophical meaning of law based on a case of Leon Ptrażycki’s psychological law theory
×
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