Suchergebnisse

The article presents the institution of an administrative agreement from the perspec­tive of legal solutions in force in selected European countries. The increase in the number and diversity of tasks performed by the administration and the multitude of conducted proceedings encourage the search for alternative forms of settling a case in relation to an administrative decision. The administrative agreement is one of them. The analysis of foreign regulations confirms that the institution in question belongs to the modern procedural laws. The scope of regulation varies, as do the individual solutions concerning the admissibility and mode of concluding the contract, its subject matter, the mechanisms for removing defects, the grounds for contestability of the contract and its enforceability. It turns out that in individual European orders two patterns of regulation dominate: French and German, although they are subject to significant modifications. The performance of certain public tasks by private parties on the basis of an administrative agreement provides for certain guarantees not only for the parties to the agreement but also for the beneficiaries of those tasks. This particular type of contract allows adequate protection of the public interest. The prevalence of the administrative agreement in Europe prompts the author to formulate a conclusion on the need to include this institution in the home system. The attempt made in the 2017 reform of the Administrative Procedure Code to include in it an administrative agreement was unsuccessful. The provisions on an administrative agreement that were then drafted were intended to give a deeper meaning to mediation, a new institution in administrative proceedings, which is currently not popular. Mediation was to precede the conclusion of an administrative agreement. However, there are no significant obstacles to returning to work on the regulation of this institution, which is so widely used in other European countries, and which is clearly lacking in its home Code. ; 53 ; 73 ; 2

The article presents the institution of an administrative agreement from the perspec-tive of legal solutions in force in selected European countries. The increase in the number and diversity of tasks performed by the administration and the multitude of conducted proceedings encourage the search for alternative forms of settling a case in relation to an administrative decision. The administrative agreement is one of them. The analysis of foreign regulations confirms that the institution in question belongs to the modern procedural laws. The scope of regulation varies, as do the individual solutions concerning the admissibility and mode of concluding the contract, its subject matter, the mechanisms for removing defects, the grounds for contestability of the contract and its enforceability. It turns out that in individual European orders two patterns of regulation dominate: French and German, although they are subject to significant modifications. The performance of certain public tasks by private parties on the basis of an administrative agreement provides for certain guarantees not only for the parties to the agreement but also for the beneficiaries of those tasks. This particular type of contract allows adequate protection of the public interest. The prevalence of the administrative agreement in Europe prompts the author to formulate a conclusion on the need to include this institution in the home system. The attempt made in the 2017 reform of the Administrative Procedure Code to include in it an administrative agreement was unsuccessful. The provisions on an administrative agreement that were then drafted were intended to give a deeper meaning to mediation, a new institution in administrative proceedings, which is currently not popular. Mediation was to precede the conclusion of an administrative agreement. However, there are no significant obstacles to returning to work on the regulation of this institution, which is so widely used in other European countries, and which is clearly lacking in its home Code ; The article presents the institution of an administrative agreement from the perspec-tive of legal solutions in force in selected European countries. The increase in the number and diversity of tasks performed by the administration and the multitude of conducted proceedings encourage the search for alternative forms of settling a case in relation to an administrative decision. The administrative agreement is one of them. The analysis of foreign regulations confirms that the institution in question belongs to the modern procedural laws. The scope of regulation varies, as do the individual solutions concerning the admissibility and mode of concluding the contract, its subject matter, the mechanisms for removing defects, the grounds for contestability of the contract and its enforceability. It turns out that in individual European orders two patterns of regulation dominate: French and German, although they are subject to significant modifications. The performance of certain public tasks by private parties on the basis of an administrative agreement provides for certain guarantees not only for the parties to the agreement but also for the beneficiaries of those tasks. This particular type of contract allows adequate protection of the public interest. The prevalence of the administrative agreement in Europe prompts the author to formulate a conclusion on the need to include this institution in the home system. The attempt made in the 2017 reform of the Administrative Procedure Code to include in it an administrative agreement was unsuccessful. The provisions on an administrative agreement that were then drafted were intended to give a deeper meaning to mediation, a new institution in administrative proceedings, which is currently not popular. Mediation was to precede the conclusion of an administrative agreement. However, there are no significant obstacles to returning to work on the regulation of this institution, which is so widely used in other European countries, and which is clearly lacking in its home Code

Cilj je ovoga rada ocijeniti primjenjivost postojećih mehanizama alternativnog rješavanja sporova u upravnom pravu i dati neke prijedloge za njihovo unaprjeđenje. U radu se analizira koncept alternativnog i konsensualnog rješavanja sporova. Zatim se izlažu prednosti i nedostaci izvansudskih oblika rješavanja upravnih stvari. Analiziraju se pozitivni propisi u Hrvatskoj, koji uređuju primjenu izvansudskih oblika rješavanja sporova. Razmatraju se metode izvansudskog rješavanja sporova u Poljskoj, koja je u vrlo sličnom pravnom okruženju, nekoliko godina ranije nastojala uvesti ove oblike rješavanja sporova u upravnom pravu. Konačno, u zaključku autori izlažu stav o primjenjivosti izvansudskih oblika rješavanja sporova u hrvatskom upravnom pravu i predlažu neke korake kako bi ih unaprijedili. ; L'obiettivo di questo lavoro è di ricercare l'applicabilità dei metodi esistenti della risoluzione alternativa delle controversie nel diritto amministrativo e di fornire alcune proposte per il miglioramento di esse. In primis, in questo lavoro è stato analizzato il concetto della risoluzione alternativa e consensuale delle controversie nel diritto amministrativo. Dopodiché, sono stati sottolineati i vantaggi e gli svantaggi delle forme non giudiziali di disposizioni nella materia amministrativa. Poi, è stata presentata la regolazione contemporanea dedicata a questi metodi in Croazia. L'esperienza dei metodi di risoluzione alternativa delle controversie in Polonia è anche stata discussa, perché la Polonia ha tentato di stabilire questo sistema in un ambiente molto simile a quello croato, ma parecchi anni fa. Infine, nella conclusione gli autori presentano la loro propensione all'applicabilità delle forme non giudiziali della risoluzione delle controversie nel diritto amministrativo croato e propongono alcuni passi per il miglioramento di esse. ; The aim of this paper is to research applicability of the existing alternative dispute resolution methods' in the administrative law and give some suggestion for their improvement. ...

The aim of this paper is to research applicability of the existing alternative dispute resolution methods' in the administrative law and give some suggestion for their improvement. Firstly, in this paper, the concept of alternative and consensual dispute resolution in administrative law is analysed. After that, the advantages and disadvantages of the non-jurisdictional forms of disposing an administrative matter are pointed out. Then, the contemporary regulations devoted to such methods in Croatia are presented. The experiences of alternative dispute resolution methods in Poland are also discussed, because Poland tried to establish this system in the very similar environment like in Croatia, but several years ago. Finally, in conclusion authors give their attitude on applicability of non-jurisdictional forms of dispute resolution in Croatian administrative law and suggest some steps for their improvements. ; Cilj je ovoga rada ocijeniti primjenjivost postojećih mehanizama alternativnog rješavanja sporova u upravnom pravu i dati neke prijedloge za njihovo unaprjeđenje. U radu se analizira koncept alternativnog i konsensualnog rješavanja sporova. Zatim se izlažu prednosti i nedostaci izvansudskih oblika rješavanja upravnih stvari. Analiziraju se pozitivni propisi u Hrvatskoj, koji uređuju primjenu izvansudskih oblika rješavanja sporova. Razmatraju se metode izvansudskog rješavanja sporova u Poljskoj, koja je u vrlo sličnom pravnom okruženju, nekoliko godina ranije nastojala uvesti ove oblike rješavanja sporova u upravnom pravu. Konačno, u zaključku autori izlažu stav o primjenjivosti izvansudskih oblika rješavanja sporova u hrvatskom upravnom pravu i predlažu neke korake kako bi ih unaprijedili. ; L'obiettivo di questo lavoro è di ricercare l'applicabilità dei metodi esistenti della risoluzione alternativa delle controversie nel diritto amministrativo e di fornire alcune proposte per il miglioramento di esse. In primis, in questo lavoro è stato analizzato il concetto della risoluzione alternativa e consensuale delle controversie nel diritto amministrativo. Dopodiché, sono stati sottolineati i vantaggi e gli svantaggi delle forme non giudiziali di disposizioni nella materia amministrativa. Poi, è stata presentata la regolazione contemporanea dedicata a questi metodi in Croazia. L'esperienza dei metodi di risoluzione alternativa delle controversie in Polonia è anche stata discussa, perché la Polonia ha tentato di stabilire questo sistema in un ambiente molto simile a quello croato, ma parecchi anni fa. Infine, nella conclusione gli autori presentano la loro propensione all'applicabilità delle forme non giudiziali della risoluzione delle controversie nel diritto amministrativo croato e propongono alcuni passi per il miglioramento di esse. ; Ziel dieses Beitrags ist es, die vorhandenen alternativen Streitbeilegungsmethoden im Verwaltungsrecht zu untersuchen und Vorschläge für ihre Verbesserung zu geben. Zuerst analysiert man im Beitrag den Begriff der alternativen und einvernehmlichen Streitbeilegung. Danach erörtert man die Vor- und Nachteile von außergerichtlichen Formen der Beilegung von Verwaltungssachen. Demnach stellt man die aktuelle Regelung, die sich auf diese Methoden in Kroatien bezieht, dar. Ebenfalls bespricht man die Erfahrungen über alternative Streitbeilegungsmethoden in Polen, weil dort vor einigen Jahren ein ähnliches System wie in Kroatien geschaffen wurde. Abschließend stellen die Autoren ihre Stellungen über die Anwendbarkeit von außergerichtlichen Formen der Streitbeilegung im kroatischen Verwaltungsrecht dar und geben Vorschläge für deren Verbesserung.

On 1 June 2017, a major amendment to the Code of Administrative Procedure came into force. The article deals with mediation incorporated into the Code as a new institution of administrative proceedings. The authors presented the advantages and disadvantages of mediation in public matters and discussed the theoretical foundations of this construction. They analysed the effectiveness of the mediation conducted in the proceedings before the administrative courts, pointing that en­trusting mediation to professional mediators (by amending the Act of 7 April 2017) was justified. The new regulation provides for mediation that is voluntary, secret, and conducted by an impartial mediator. The amending act does not specify the preferred mediation strategies, leaving this issue to the mediators, but the analysis of the content of the new provisions leads to the conclusion that the evaluative type of mediation is the leading one. The amended provision of Article 13 § 1 of the Code allows mediation in any matter, provided its the nature is sufficiently suitable. In the Authors' opinion, mediation should be allowed especially in matters that need to be resolved basing on the administrative discretion and in matters whose settlement requires the interpretation of terms that are not specified. In the authors opinion, mediation may be an effective instrument for eliminating administrative disputes but requires proper preparation of the clerks involved.

On 1 June 2017, a major amendment to the Code of Administrative Procedure came into force. The article deals with mediation incorporated into the Code as a new institution of administrative proceedings. The authors presented the advantages and disadvantages of mediation in public matters and discussed the theoretical foundations of this construction. They analysed the effectiveness of the mediation conducted in the proceedings before the administrative courts, pointing that entrusting mediation to professional mediators (by amending the Act of 7 April 2017) was justified. The new regulation provides for mediation that is voluntary, secret, and conducted by an impartial mediator. The amending act does not specify the preferred mediation strategies, leaving this issue to the mediators, but the analysis of the content of the new provisions leads to the conclusion that the evaluative type of mediation is the leading one. The amended provision of Article 13 § 1 of the Code allows mediation in any matter, provided its the nature is sufficiently suitable. In the Authors' opinion, mediation should be allowed especially in matters that need to be resolved basing on the administrative discretion and in matters whose settlement requires the interpretation of terms that are not specified. In the authors opinion, mediation may be an effective instrument for eliminating administrative disputes but requires proper preparation of the clerks involved. ; On 1 June 2017, a major amendment to the Code of Administrative Procedure came into force. The article deals with mediation incorporated into the Code as a new institution of administrative proceedings. The authors presented the advantages and disadvantages of mediation in public matters and discussed the theoretical foundations of this construction. They analysed the effectiveness of the mediation conducted in the proceedings before the administrative courts, pointing that entrusting mediation to professional mediators (by amending the Act of 7 April 2017) was justified. The new regulation provides for mediation that is voluntary, secret, and conducted by an impartial mediator. The amending act does not specify the preferred mediation strategies, leaving this issue to the mediators, but the analysis of the content of the new provisions leads to the conclusion that the evaluative type of mediation is the leading one. The amended provision of Article 13 § 1 of the Code allows mediation in any matter, provided its the nature is sufficiently suitable. In the Authors' opinion, mediation should be allowed especially in matters that need to be resolved basing on the administrative discretion and in matters whose settlement requires the interpretation of terms that are not specified. In the authors opinion, mediation may be an effective instrument for eliminating administrative disputes but requires proper preparation of the clerks involved.