The increasing number of executive tasks assigned to EU institutions and agencies has resulted in a greater demand for justice that can no longer be satisfied by the courts alone. This has led to the development of a wide range of administrative remedies that have become a central part of the EU administrative justice system. This book examines the important theoretical and practical issues raised by this phenomenon. The work focuses on five administrative remedies: internal review; administrative appeals to the Commission against decisions of executive and decentralised agencies; independent administrative review of decisions of decentralised agencies; complaints to the EU Ombudsman; and complaints to the EU Data Protection Supervisor. The research rests on the idea that there is a complex, and at times ambivalent, relationship between administrative remedies and the varying degrees of autonomy of EU institutions and bodies, offices and agencies. The work draws on legislation, internal rules of executive bodies, administrative practices and specific case law, data and statistics. This empirical approach helps to unveil the true dynamics present within these procedures and demonstrates that whilst administrative remedies may improve the relationship between individuals and the EU administration, their interplay with administrative autonomy might lead to a risk of fragmentation and incoherence in the EU administrative justice system.

The increasing number of executive tasks assigned to EU institutions and agencies has resulted in a greater demand for justice that can no longer be satisfied by the courts alone. This has led to the development of a wide range of administrative remedies that have become a central part of the EU administrative justice system. This book examines the important theoretical and practical issues raised by this phenomenon. The work focuses on five administrative remedies: internal review; administrative appeals to the Commission against decisions of executive and decentralised agencies; independent administrative review of decisions of decentralised agencies; complaints to the EU Ombudsman; and complaints to the EU Data Protection Supervisor. The research rests on the idea that there is a complex, and at times ambivalent, relationship between administrative remedies and the varying degrees of autonomy of EU institutions and bodies, offices and agencies. The work draws on legislation, internal rules of executive bodies, administrative practices and specific case law, data and statistics. This empirical approach helps to unveil the true dynamics present within these procedures and demonstrates that whilst administrative remedies may improve the relationship between individuals and the EU administration, their interplay with administrative autonomy might lead to a risk of fragmentation and incoherence in the EU administrative justice system.

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.

Provides coverage of the situations in which judicial review is available, the range of measures that can be challenged, the ambit of remedies in public law cases and the machinery for making an application

This book examines administrative silence in a comparative manner in the EU law and 13 jurisdictions from Europe. Administrative silence is an issue that lies at the intersection of legal and managerial aspects of public administration, a concept that is both reflecting and testing the principles of legal certainty, legality, good administration, legitimate expectations, and effectiveness. Inactivity or excessive length of proceedings appears to be of interest for comparisons, particularly in the context of the recent attempts to develop European convergence models. The book offers in-depth insights into legal regulation, theory, case law and practice regarding positive and negative legal fictions in the selected European jurisdictions.

The third edition of EU Administrative Law provides comprehensive coverage of the administrative system in the EU and the principles of judicial review that apply in this area. This revised edition provides important updates on each area covered, including new case law; institutional developments; and EU legislation. These changes are located within the framework of broader developments in the EU. The chapters in the first half of the book deal with all the principal variants of the EU administrative regime. Thus there are chapters dealing with the history and taxonomy of the EU administrative regime; direct administration; shared administration; comitology; agencies; social partners; and the open method of coordination. The coverage throughout focuses on the legal regime that governs the particular form of administration and broader issues of accountability, drawing on literature from political science as well as law. The focus in the second part of the book shifts to judicial review. There are detailed chapters covering all principles of judicial review and the discussion of the law throughout is analytical and contextual. It begins with the principles that have informed the development of EU judicial review. This is followed by a chapter dealing with the judicial system and the way in which reform could impact on the subject matter of the book. There are then chapters dealing with competence; access; transparency; process; law, fact and discretion; rights; equality; legitimate expectations; two chapters on proportionality; the precautionary principle; two chapters on remedies; and the Ombudsman.