Заготовка для базы номеров

 

ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION: CONCEPT, ESSENCE, PROBLEMS OF DELIMITATION

 

The criteria of administrative jurisdiction have been denominated and characterized. Such criteria include the issue in law, subjective content of public relations, existence of public relations and public interest.

The conclusion on the administrative and legal nature of administrative jurisdiction has been done.

Key words: administrative jurisdiction, criteria, public relations, interest, subjects of public administration.

 

For the areas of nation law, in particular the administrative procedural law, it is typical to use the constructions, categories and notions which physically don’t exist and form exceptionally the product of human thinking.

Such issues received the name of fictitious or juridical fictions, in other words, those which can be considered as an invention, non-existent object. The theory of fictions which according to Trubetskoi E.M., was first developed by Savigny, had a lot of adherents in the pre-revolutionary period. The idea of the theory was the following: on the one side, in order to achieve the number of required aims, which cannot be realized by different efforts of separate human beings, it seems necessary to create the institutions and corporations with certain property and other rights. At the same time, legal capacity feels lack of a real subject which could be the owner, carrier. Whereas the rights cannot be without subject: it is impossible to speak about the rights without ascribing them to anyone. This can be considered as an explanation for the necessity to use the fictions which foresee the creation (formation in human imagination) of a fictitious, artificial person [1].

In the opinion of the legal specialists in Ancient Rome, the first and most important trait of the legal fictions in Roman law consisted in that the fictions obliged to “accept the existing condition as non-existing and vice versa the non-exiting as existing”. The Roman legal specialists considered the incomprehensible words as not written ones, the returned goods with defects were considered as failing to return, that is they declared to be non-existing the things which existed in reality.

For instance, when a pregrinus (foreigner, inhabitant of Roman colony who didn’t have Roman citizenship) was perceived as a Roman citizen or Roman who came back after captivity was considered the one who hadn’t been to captivity. Roman law declared as real the facts which actually didn’t exist [2].

One of the fictions in modern administrative procedural law and practice of administrative legal proceeding is the concept of “administrative jurisdiction”, legally introduced by the Code of administrative proceeding of Ukraine (CAP of Ukraine). Upon its approval in 2005 this concept started to be widely applied in the science of administrative and administrative and procedural law as well [3].

Nevertheless, it is important to underline that the category “administrative jurisdictions” is not new for national procedural science and law. However before its complete introduction in Ukraine of the administrative jurisdiction and approval of the relevant legislation in the Principle Law of Ukraine, the civil and economic proceeding have already made reference and used similar mechanisms of separation of legal disputes between the courts of general jurisdiction.

The constitutional provision on courts’ jurisdiction (article 124 of the Constitution of Ukraine) [4] and the application in civil and economic proceedings of the notions of “competence” and “dependence” [5] preceded the official consolidation of the category “administrative jurisdiction”.

Nevertheless in 2004 the Civil procedural code of Ukraine was approved and the category “jurisdiction” was first introduced into the practice of the courts of general jurisdiction which specialize in civil, housing, family, labor proceedings as well as into the scientific sphere.

In the scientific and informational editions and encyclopedias one can find the following interpretation for the “jurisdiction” concept (lat. jurisdictio – court language, sphere of law expansion) – subject competence of court or other jurisdiction institution which possesses the authorities to delimit the juridical cases. For example, the civil judicial jurisdiction is a legally determined competence of court to investigate the cases about protection of the violated, unrecognized or litigated rights, liberties or interests [6].

The legal jurisdictions shall be defined by the structural and functional character of judicial power and delimits the competence of its bodies within the sphere of its activity and existing judicial system. The jurisdiction defines the activity of the courts of first, appellation and cassation instance as well as the sphere of action of general and specialized courts [7].

Whereas upon introduction of the new constructions, in particular the term of “administrative jurisdiction” appeared the situation when the modern science of administrative law of Ukraine (overloaded by archaic and as a result regressive achievements and notions of science of soviet and post-soviet administrative law) is not capable to present due argumentation for the innovations offered by administrative procedural legislation. At the modern stage of existence of national system of law, the administrative procedural legislation in its development leaves behind the science of administrative law which suffers from the lack of potential to present argumentation to the concepts, nature and criteria of administrative jurisdiction [8].

It is important that in spite of completely procedural nature of administrative jurisdiction as it may seem, it is based on the categories of substantive law – administrative. Thus, in our opinion, one should seek answers to the numerous questions about the nature and identification of such procedural institute as administrative jurisdiction in the sphere of administrative and legal science.

Consequently, while investigating the nature of administrative jurisdiction, we have to take as a basis that: 1) it is based on the norms of constitutional law and thus it possesses constitutional nature;

2) it is one of the traditional procedural institutes which was once somehow grounded by civil (domestic) procedural science; 3) this is an institute of administrative procedural law which was developed and should be used exceptionally taking into account modern (advanced) positions of administrative and legal science. The fundamental and successful knowledge of administrative jurisdiction should be grounded on many-sided comprehension of the peculiarities and interconnection of constitutional law, procedural law (civil procedural law, domestic procedural law), administrative law.

Thus upon establishment of the national institute of administrative jurisdiction and legal fastening of the system of administrative courts appeared some procedural problems which are connected with the realization of justice in administrative cases. Due to approbation of the Code of administrative legal proceeding of Ukraine which has defined a huge part of new positions of conceptual character, appeared the necessity of their interpretation, definition of the nature and peculiarities of the content of some procedural and legal institutes. Thus, the formation of administrative courts in the system of the courts of general jurisdiction conditions the demand of definition of the criteria of administrative jurisdiction [9].

The demand of definition and delimitation of jurisdiction between administrative and other courts of general and constitutional jurisdictions is caused due to the fact that the judges on the basis of the valid procedural legislation not always correctly and definitively define the appliance of a certain public and legal dispute to a relevant court. A numerous amount of the works of legal scientists, huge number of explanations of the highest court instances about the peculiarities of delimitation of the competence of the specialized courts can serve as a confirmation for the actual status of the topic of dependence of public and legal disputes.

The peculiarities of administrative jurisdiction have been investigated by the following scientists: V.B.Averianov, Y.P.Bytiak, R.O.Kuibida, O.M.Pasenuk, Y.S.Pedko, D.M.Prytyka, M.I.Smokovych, M.I.Zurkan, V.S.Stefanuk, V.I.Shishkin. Nevertheless the answer to the question on the volume and content of the competence of administrative courts has not yet been given by legal science and by national legislation as well.

We consider that for the definition of the administrative jurisdiction it is necessary to take into account the presence and content of the following criteria: 1) issue on law; 2) subjective content of public and legal relations; 3) presence of public and legal relations; 4) presence of public interest. Beginning the analysis of the criteria of administrative jurisdiction we can state that in general the criteria are equally characteristic for all public and legal disputes which can be investigated by the courts of general and constitutional jurisdiction. However, the difference between these criteria resides first of all in their content and secondly in the condition of their appearance.

By staying in some legal relations, their subjects use the received rights and follow some obligations. Nevertheless, not always the realization by the subjects of public and legal relations of their authorities occurs without any obstacles. Very often the interests of some subjects contradict the interests of other participants of legal relations. That is why the collision of legal interests stipulates for the appearance of the disputes about the possibility and order of realization of these or that rights, observance of the obligations.

Thus while investigating the first criteria of administrative jurisdiction, the issue on law, which is within the jurisdiction of administrative court, it is necessary to bear in mind that this issue is directly connected with public and legal relations. Such conclusion can be done upon analyzing the provisions of the part 1 of the article 2, part 2 of the article 17 of Administrative proceeding code of Ukraine. According to the stated the jurisdiction of administrative courts includs the public and legal disputes (public and legal relations) [10].

In addition we consider that the part 2 of the article 2 of Administrative proceeding code of Ukraine describes precisely the grounding for appearance of administrative disputes, that is any resolutions, actions or inactions of the subjects of power authorities except for the cases when the Constitution or laws of Ukraine stipulate another legal proceeding referred to such resolutions, actions or inactions [10].

Thus, first of all, the legal disputes which appeared as a result of such relations in accordance with their nature are public and legal. Taken together the public and legal relations form the subject of law. As it has been defined by the science of modern administrative law [11], its subject includes the relations which appear due to the realization of the administrative and regulation influence on economic, social and cultural and administrative and political spheres of social life.

However we should take into account that the subject of administrative law is formed by the following relations: 1) effecting of the function of service and attendant content; 2) effecting of the functions of general organizational content; 3) effecting the measure of administrative compulsory content; 4) celebration and execution of administrative agreements .

Taking into account previously done conclusion, we can claim that secondly the subject of the administrative law itself permits to determine definitely that a certain legal issue belongs to the competence of administrative court and thus the content of this subject shall be taken into account while division of legal disputes between the specialized courts of Ukraine.

While analyzing the second criterion which forms part of the definition of administrative jurisdiction and its delimitation from other judicial jurisdictions is a subjective compound of the members of the disputable relations. We would like to underline that with its assistance it is possible to define a certain limit between the competences of these court institutions.

In a legal dispute a subject of power authorities which executes the tasks and functions entrusted by the valid legislation, is always present in a dependent administrative court. As the concept of the “subject of power authorities” is widely and ambiguously used in administrative law, it is of importance to specify it detailed characteristics.

The existence of the fact that the subject of power authorities fulfills its own or delegated public powers in order to execute practically the provision of the Constitution and law of Ukraine, is of principal importance for recognizing the legal dispute as one which is dependent on an administrative court. Thus, the peculiarity of the executive power among the other state power branches resides in the fact that in the process of its realization, the law and other normative state acts find their real application and the key factor of state regulation and management of the significant processes of social life are practically used. At the same time the main direction of the executive power consists in the confirmation and guarantee of the human rights and liberties which is declared by the Constitution of Ukraine (article 3) to be the “highest social value” [13].

Taking into consideration the subjective content of disputable relations, we find it necessary to specify that the relations which appear due to the realization by the subjects of power authorities of their power functions (functions of state administration, state regulation, service and attendant functions, general organization, realization of the administrative enforcement measures, conclusion and execution of administrative agreements) which form the main content of their activity are dependent on administrative courts.

Whereas we find it appropriate to observe that false are the attempts to determine (identify) the jurisdiction of administrative courts only in the case when the subject of power authorities fulfills a power management function (functions) which are determined in the Code of administrative proceeding as an identifying criteria of definition of such jurisdiction. As it has been proved, the jurisdiction of administrative courts will take place only when one or more functions are fulfilled, e.g. the function of state regulation, service and attendance function, general organization function, administrative enforcement function, conclusion and execution of administrative agreements.

So, in case the subject (in particular, the state power body, local self-management body, its official or functionary) doesn’t fulfill in the disputable relations one or more of the stated functions of the specified functions in connection to another subject which is a member of the dispute, in such case the dispute doesn’t have the traits of administrative jurisdiction case which are specified in the Code of administrative proceeding of Ukraine and should not be resolved in the administrative court [14].

An approximate list of the subjects of power authorities is included into the norms of the Code of administrative proceeding of Ukraine, in the article 2 of the Code which foresees the possibility of court protection of public rights, liberties and interest (part 1 of the article 2 of the Code of administrative proceeding of Ukraine) from:

• state power bodies;

• local self-management bodies;

• other functionaries and officials;

• other subjects upon their realization of power management functions, in particular, for fulfillment of delegated powers.

At the same time it is substantial to bear in mind that the public power functions opposite to the legislative activity and legal proceeding can be done not only by the executive power bodies. The other subjects can participate in this process as well:

- President of Ukraine;

- public prosecution office;

- state power bodies which don’t form part of the system of executive power bodies;

- subjects of public power with special status;

- juridical persons of public law which don’t have the status of public power body;

- juridical persons of private law;

- physical persons;

- subjects of self-managing professions.

The characteristics of the subjects of public and legal relations and the scope of their activities as the criteria to define the jurisdiction of the administrative courts will be incomplete if not to take into account the public property and relations which are formed due to its application.

The public and legal relations appear not only due to fulfillment by the physical (juridical) persons, the subjects of public administration of their rights but also in the process of their compliance with the juridical obligations.

Such legal relations are formed for the objects of material world, which the society or subjects of public administrations can openly use together at the same time in order to achieve the public aim (public tasks) or physical persons of subjects of public administration.

Different types of public property exist. Each of them can be characterized by a legal regime and list of subjects which are empowered to dispose of it or apply any types of administrative activity to it. This is why a certain notion of the types of public property guarantees the understanding of the nature of legal regime and subjects of such type.

If to classify the public property according to its intended purpose, the following types can be determined:

• property which ensures the functioning of the subjects of public administration – transport, means of communication. This type of public property is an instrument of fulfillment by the subjects of power authorities of their power authorities;

• property of state and municipal institutions and funds – monetary funds, building and equipment;

• public property of general use – streets, passages, roads, squares, parks, garden squares, etc.;

• public monetary funds as a type of public property – local and state budget which provide financing to these subjects;

• natural resources, corporate rights which belong to the state as a part of statute capital of economic institutions.

Thereafter a more correspondent term which could define all the subjects which execute the public power authorities should be the subject of public administration [15].

The third and fourth criteria which demonstrate the administrative jurisdiction consist in the presence of public and legal relations and public interest. It has been stated in the national administrative procedural legislation that the task of the administrative proceeding is the protection of the rights, liberties and interest of physical persons in the sphere of public and legal relations from the violation by the specified subjects (part 1 of the article 2 of the Code of administrative proceeding of Ukraine).

The legal relations in any sphere of law play one of the main roles. With their participation, the subjective powers are effected, the function of empowered subjects are realized, the tasks of the state power bodies and local administration institutions are fulfilled. The legal relations are characterized by general character, because some of them, in particular administrative ones, are formed in the sphere of state and municipal administration, in other words, direct daily practical organization of domestic, social and cultural and protective activity of state bodies and relevant social organizations.

Taking into account the philological interpretation of the notion “public” (from Latin publicus – “social, popular”), it should be understood as open, public, social [16]. Thus, coming to a previous conclusion about the public character of public relations, we can state that these relations which after having appeared, are expanding or can expand on the whole society or part hereof. That is why they have general social character with general meaning. The main peculiarity of public relations is that they without exception though in a different way involve general (public) interests and can involve the interests of rule of law in a whole [17]. Public legal relations are an expression of public social interest [18].

The next trait which permits to come to a conclusion of public character of legal relations is the presence in these relations of an element of legal obligations which in opinion of A.I.Elistratov, under any conditions is present as a part of public legal relations. The public right presents its demand to the functionaries and citizens for the greater good and in such manner obliges to use as a basis of their public activities the moment of social obligation.

This issue of obligation doesn’t exclude more or less space which is given by the norms of public law by legal relations members. Still, no matter how wide the public authorities of the power representatives and citizens become, the issue of obligations continue playing important role in the public law.

The possibility to use public law in bigger of smaller scope or not to use it at all depends on the legal obligations. Thus, the public rights of state power authorities and other subjects of public authorities, physical and juridical persons are subordinate to the demands of social obligation in the public and legal relations [19]. The presence of public authorities obliges the state power authorities, local administration bodies, their official and functionaries having public authorities to become involved into public legal relations and execute their powers.

If to continue the topic of presence in the content of public and legal relations of legal obligations, we should add that it is foreseen by the legislation in order to secure the achievement of a certain social and state result:

- satisfaction of legal interest (e.g. to submit for consideration of a village council the issue of submitting to the village inhabitants of a land plot, inclusion into the election list of a citizen) or formation of certain benefits (privileges) for a huge number of participant of social relations (maintenance of roads of a living area in a good state, construction of building and structures of general use, introduction of lower rates with benefits for the use of municipal services for people). These interests are non-uniform and even can often contradict one to another (state interest to the interests of territory community, interest of territory community to the interests of a certain person, etc.)

The legal interest can be defined as a desire to provide the benefits which have general social meaning, in other words the benefits which are important not for one person but for a huge number of people [20]. In our opinion A.I.Elistratov expressed an interesting and reasonable opinion referred to public interest: the definition of social interest by the power authorities depends on the cultural level. The opinion of the power authorities on the general benefit may differ to the interests of the majority of population. But in any case the demands of the ruling power authorities are presented for the citizens not as a private interest of some power representatives but as a general benefit [21];

- favor in realization and protection of subjective rules, liberties, legal interests by physical persons, rights, interest by juridical persons. Thus, pursuant to the norms of the Law of Ukraine “About state registration of juridical persons and physical persons – entrepreneurs” [22], organization and realization of state registration of juridical persons and physical persons – entrepreneurs (obligation of state registration) shall be done by specially empowered body of state registration issues, executive committee of municipal council of a city of regional meaning, district and municipal state administration in the cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol (articles 5 and 7). So these subjects favor realization by physical persons of their constitutional right for business activity which is not prohibited by the law (article 42 of the Constitution of Ukraine);

- realization of some public (state, social) tasks and functions delegated to a certain body, such as the protection of social order, protection of subjective rights, liberties, interests, etc. The main role among the local bodies of executive authorities play the state administrations which execute executive power on the territory of a relevant administrative and territory unit, planning, coordination, operative administration of domestic, social and cultural and administrative activity, unite the realization of state politics in some areas as well as execute the powers delegated by certain councils [23];

− performance of auxiliary functions of public character to ensure proper fulfillment of the main tasks stipulated in the norms of applicable legislation by state government bodies, local government bodies and their functionaries and officials. In particular, the auxiliary functions are the following: organization of internal activity of apparatus of a state government body, local government body, state enterprise, institution and establishment; organization and performance of service in state government bodies, local governments, state enterprises, institutions and establishments by their officials.

Fulfillment of legal duties by state government bodies, local government bodies, their functionaries and officials, other individuals vested with public powers always has a procedural character, for virtually such fulfillment is always implemented in a number, complex of actions aimed at achievement of a particular result. Thus, the practical existence of any specific public legal relations is somehow related to the relevant administrative procedure, regulated by legal norms. Such elements of administrative proceedings as legal enforcement activities and activities on its ensuring require procedural implementation [24].

Summarizing the study of the essence of public legal relations, we have distinguished their main and determinant characteristics, as follows [25]:

− legal relations may be considered public if they can arise again after ceasing to exist in unlimited number, of the same quality and content, with the same object, same or any other entities. Thus, public legal relations are characterized by their unlimited similar repetition by the same or other entities, the ability to involve or join one type of relations by indefinitely wide range of entities, public relations of a certain type and entities composition and content may arise endless number of times (the most prominent example of such legal relations can be the activity of state government body apparatus. Every day a government official exercises the powers related to the performance of official duties: review of citizens’ appeals, preparation and issue of documents, inspections, performance of administrative supervision, state registration, application of administrative enforcement measures, etc.).

Instead, private relations are mostly unique, rare, exceptional, special, non-recurring. Originating once with certain entities in relation to a particular object, these relations will not arise again, let alone for a third or fourth time. In fact, a sales contract on a particular subject between the same individuals is almost never concluded several times. The uniqueness of private legal relations (in particular, a sales contract) is evidenced in the occurrence conditions, subject of these relations and form of their implementation. Therefore, according to the article 655 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, in a sales contract, one party (the seller) transfers or agrees to transfer the property (goods) into the ownership of the other party (the buyer), and the buyer accepts or agrees to accept the property (goods) and pay a certain sum of money for it. A sales contract of land, single property complex, house (apartment) or other immovable property is concluded in writing and is subject to notarization and state registration (article 657 of the Civil Code of Ukraine) [26];

− rights and duties (powers) of legal entities are exercised through legal relations, therefore, one of the main factors of the recognition of legal relations as public relations is the quality of such powers. The right vested on a private person as a member of the family and the owner is a civil right (private); a right that belongs to the state and derives from the notion of the state as a political union is a public right. [27] Thus, in public legal relations, either 1) public rights are exercised (electoral rights, rights on public property), public responsibilities are performed (responsibilities of government entities as provided by the law), or 2) private powers of others are violated, limited or not recognized by public entities.

Illegal actions can be committed on the basis of decisions of the relevant authorities or their officials, and they (i.e. illegal actions) are not foreseen anywhere. For example, it could be a self-regulating eviction, violations of customs inspection, unauthorized detention, listening, turning off phones, restrictions on the export of goods. [28] Instead, conscientious and unconditional exercising of private powers is possible only in private legal relations;

- in public legal relations the functions and methods of state administration are frequently exercised. Separate administration methods are of state-government nature, for the state is the only legal institution of legalized coercion on the whole society. As V.V. Ivanovskyi puts it, “Administrative agencies and agents of power have quite substantial rights in relation to the private individuals, the administration can take all sorts of coercive measures” [29].

Being an instrument for implementation of national policy, administrative methods are partly employed despite the will of the participants of administrative relations (at the same time, some private institutions are also denied the right to employ certain administrative methods because they are the subjects of administration, endowed with a set of relevant powers);

- state regulation is also implemented through public legal relations, being a state-government influence of the authorized entities on the basis of existing legislation on social relations in the form of the establishment of simultaneously admissible, several alternative rules of conduct in order to ensure specific individual, public and state interests. State regulation, in fact, forms means of regulating and ordering of social relations, which, unlike the state administration should be recognized as more liberal lever of influence on social objects. Such quality of state administration is explained by the minimal state intervention in the activity of the administered objects and their ability to operate within certain limits in their sole discretion; the idea of forming the legal relations between these entities based on the principles of partnership, equality of legal status and mutual responsibility gets further practical spreading [30];

- public legal relations, being a subject of research in the administrative court, are always social relations regulated by the rules of public law (constitutional, administrative, administrative and procedural), the main idea of which is to ensure harmony and understanding in society, balance of the interests of an individual, groups, communities and society as a whole, the stability of the state and its institutions, stability of the foundations of economic and social development [31]. Therefore, any public legal relations are social relations in which the subjects of these relations intend to fulfill both a subjective and general, social and state legal interest through mutual concessions;

- public legal relations arise and spread in society as a whole or in a substantial part of it;

- in public legal relations a legal obligation is performed to achieve one of the following tasks: 1) meet or achieve social and state legal interests; 2) assist in the implementation and protection of subjective rights, freedoms and legitimate interests; 3) perform public (state, social) tasks and functions of a particular authority; 4) exercise ancillary functions of a public nature to ensure proper implementation of the main tasks by state government bodies, local government bodies and their functionaries and officials. At that, only natural or legal individuals may be the members of public legal relations, except for the entity of public or governmental powers, which performs its legal obligations in such legal relations. Thus, public legal relations necessarily have one entity, and sometimes even two entities exercise generally significant social and state interest at the same time. Instead, engaging in private legal relations, the entities always intend to realize only their own interest and satisfy personal aspirations;

- a legal duty is performed by the entity of public or governmental powers usually in relation to any and all participants of social relations or to the quantitative group of such participants (those who committed an administrative offense are brought to administrative liability by authorized entities) if the legislation has no specific restrictions of performing such duty. For instance, according to the Article 19 of the Law of Ukraine “On Citizens' Appeals” [32] state and local government bodies, enterprises, institutions and establishments regardless of ownership, public institutions, mass media, their leaders and other officials are required to check applications and complaints objectively, comprehensively and promptly, within their competence. However, a written appeal without specifying the place of residence, not signed by the author (authors), as well as an appeal, the authorship of which cannot be authenticated, is deemed anonymous and not subject to consideration; repeated appeal of the same body and the same citizen on the same question are not considered, if the first appeal has been resolved in essence, as well as those appeals, the time for consideration of which is stipulated by the Article 17 of the Law of Ukraine “On Citizens' Appeals”, and appeals of individuals declared as incapable by a court;

- in public legal relations the continuous submission to the will of the entity of public powers does not exist, but in case of entry of this entity to the legal relations of public nature, the person concerned (natural or legal) incurs the responsibility to follow certain rules of conduct established by the rules of law;

- public legal relations arise from the legal facts and cease upon onset of these facts. Legal facts that are the basis of rise and cease of public legal relations, are performed (occur) in public, being observed by a large number of natural individuals. These legal facts, for instance, may be a speech of the head of a specialized scientific council, announcement of an expert opinion, publication of report of the official opponent, acts of entities of public governmental powers;

- decisions, acts or inactivity that arise in public legal relations may be appealed officially in both administrative and judicial procedure. It is, for instance, the appeal against the inactivity of examination committee expert of a specialized academic council to the head of the same council; appeal against actions of the representative of a collective enterprise to its head. Instead, the decisions, actions or inactivity of participants of most private and legal relations can only be appealed in court. Thus, in accordance with the Part 1 of the Article 16 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, every person has the right to appeal to a court to protect their personal non-property and property rights and interests.

Exploring the nature of public and legal relations, we cannot agree more with Y.S Pedko, who believes they are the social relations that arise between certain legal entities mainly about the implementation of public governmental powers, realization and protection of subjective public rights and freedoms, meeting the public interest and are regulated by a complex of public and legal norms of different areas of law. [33]

It is worth to express the fundamental idea that the analyzed set of criteria for administrative jurisdiction, with some exceptions, is similar to other court jurisdiction, such as constitutional, civil, economic jurisdiction. Determining jurisdiction of specific type gets complicated due to the fact that some disputed legal relations may possess the criteria for both public and private law.

The problems of separating court jurisdictions arise due to two main factors: 1) inaccurate determination of such criteria or inability to define them clearly; 2) both public and private legal relations do not exist in isolation, they are often combined. These factors and criteria for determining the administrative jurisdiction are vividly represented in the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on the nature of land relations and disputes that arise from them:

- “the provisions of the paragraphs “a”, “b”, “c”, “d” of the article 12 of the Land Code of Ukraine in the part of authority of village, settlement, and city councils, in accordance with this code, to settle the disposal issues of lands of the territorial community lands, transfer of the communal property lands to the ownership of citizens and legal individuals, the provision of land for usage from the lands of communal property, expropriation of land from the lands of communal property should be considered in the context that in dealing with such issues these councils act as entities of governmental powers”[34];

- “the provisions of the paragraph 1 of the first part of the article 17 of the Code of Administrative Proceeding of Ukraine concerning the spread of the competence of administrative courts to “disputes of natural or legal individuals with an entity of governmental powers concerning the appeal against its decisions (normative legal acts or legal acts of individual action), acts or inactivity” should be considered in the context that the public legal disputes that are within the jurisdiction of administrative courts, also include land disputes of natural or legal individuals with a local government body as an entity of authority related to the appeal against its decisions, actions or inaction" [34].

After completing the analysis of administrative jurisdiction criteria: 1) dispute of law; 2) membership of public legal relations; 3) availability of public legal relations; 4) availability of public interest, we would like to emphasize that such jurisdiction shall take place only upon existence of all criteria. The absence of at least one of them shall mean the impossibility of attributing a particular legal dispute to the jurisdiction of the administrative court.

The following conclusions are obvious [35].

Firstly, given the administrative procedural law has been adopted in Ukraine, currently there is an urgent need and objective conditions of creation and development of science and independent branch of modern administrative procedural law, fundamentally different from the administrative procedural law based on the administrative law of the Soviet era.

Secondly, the concept, content, system, social and state purpose of administrative law of Ukraine require a fundamental reassessment.

Thirdly, the so-called general and special administrative processes in Ukraine are scarcely explored or even unexplored.

Thus, it may be summarized that administrative jurisdiction - is an interdisciplinary legal institution (including the institute of administrative law and administrative procedural law), by which the administrative courts identify (define) the public legal disputes of their competence.

 

Владимир Бевзенко.Административная юрисдикция: понятие, суть, проблемы разграничения.

Названо и охарактеризовано критерии административной юрисдикции. Такими критериями определено спор о праве, субъектный состав публично-правовых отношений, присутствие публично-правовых отношений.

Сделано вывод об административно-правовой природе административной юрисдикции.

Ключевые слова: административная юрисдикция, критерий, публично-правовые отношения, интерес, субъекты публичной администрации.

Volodymyr Bevzenko. The administrative jurisdiction: concept, essence, problems of delimitation.

Named and characterized the criteria of administrative jurisdiction. Such criteria defined issue of law, the subject structure of public-law relationship, the presence of public-law relationship.

The conclusion about the administrative and legal nature of administrative jurisdiction.

Key words: administrative jurisdiction, criterion of public-law relationship, interest, subjects of public administration.

 

Literature:

1. Трубецкой Е.Н. Энциклопедия права // В кн.: Філософія та енциклопедія права в Університеті Святого Володимира : у 2 кн. − Кн. 2 / уклад. І.С. Гриценко, В.А. Короткий ; за ред. І.С. Грищенка. − К.: Либідь, 2011. − С. 345.

2. Лотфуллин Р.К. Юридические фикции в гражданском праве / Лотфуллин Р.К. − М.: Юристъ, 2006. − С. 15.

3. Бевзенко В. М. Фікції в адміністративному процесі й адміністративному процесуальному праві України / Бевзенко В. М. // Вісник Вищого адміністративного суду України. − 2012. − № 4. – С. 66−74; Бевзенко В. М. Фікції в адміністративному процесі й адміністративному процесуальному праві України / Бевзенко В. М. // Адміністративне право і процес. – 2012. − № 2(2). – С. 99-108.

4. Конституція України від 28 червня 1996 року // Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 1996. − № 30. − Ст. 141.

5. Цивільний процесуальний кодекс України від 18 липня 1963 року; Цивільний процесуальний кодекс України від 18 березня 2004 року // Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 2004. − № 40-41, 42. − Ст. 492; Господарський процесуальний кодекс України від 6 листопада 1991 року № 1798-XII // Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 1992. − № 6. − Ст. 56.

6. Васильев С.В. Энциклопедия гражданского процесса / Васильев С.В. − Х.: Харьков юридический, 2009. − С. 793, 794.

7. Проблеми теорії та практики цивільного судочинства: Монографія / [Комаров В.В., Тертишніков В.І., Баранкова В.В., Бігун В.А. та ін.]; За заг. ред. професора В.В. Комарова. − Х.: Харків юридичний, 2008. − С. 179.

8. Бевзенко В.М. Новітнє адміністративне процесуальне право України : об’єктивна закономірність чи надумана вигадка? / В.М. Бевзенко // Форум права. − 2011. − № 1. − С. 68-73 [Електронний ресурс]. − Режим доступу : http://nbuv.gov.ua/e-journals/FP/2011-1/11bvmhnv.pdf .

9. Бевзенко В.М. Особливості визначення підвідомчості публічно-правових спорів / Бевзенко В.М., Мінько С.М. // Вісник господарського судочинства. – 2007. – № 3. – С. 122-126.

10. Кодекс адміністративного судочинства України від 6 липня 2005 року № 2747-IV // Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 2005. − № 35-36, № 37. − Ст. 446.

11. Основи адміністративного судочинства та адміністративного права: навч. посібник / За заг. редакцією Куйбіди Р.О., Шишкіна В.І. – К.: Старий світ, 2006. − С. 123, 124; Бевзенко В.М. Концептуальні засади теорії державного регулювання // Адміністративне право і процес: шляхи вдосконалення законодавства і практики: Зб. матер. наук-практ. конф. (м. Київ, 22 грудня 2006 р.) / Ред. кол.: О.М. Джужа, В.М. Дзюба, С.Г. Стеценко та ін. – К., 2006. – С. 54.

12. Бевзенко В.М. Участь в адміністративному судочинстві України суб’єктів владних повноважень: правові засади, підстави та форми: Монографія / Бевзенко В.М. − К.: Прецедент, 2010. − С. 99-100.

13. Виконавча влада і адміністративне право / За заг. ред. В.Б. Авер’янова. – К.: Видавничий Дім «Ін-Юре», 2002. − С. 17.

14. Інформаційний лист Верховного Суду України “Щодо застосування господарськими судами України положень процесуального законодавства стосовно розмежування компетенції між спеціалізованими адміністративними і господарськими судами” від 26 грудня 2005 року № 3.2.–2005 // Вісник господарського судочинства. – 2006. – № 2.

15. Бевзенко В.М. Участь в адміністративному судочинстві України суб’єктів владних повноважень: правові засади, підстави та форми: Монографія / Бевзенко В.М. − К.: Прецедент, 2010. − С. 58, 59.

16. Юридична енциклопедія: В 6 т. / Редкол.: Ю.С. Шемшученко (голова редкол.) та ін. / НАН України, Інститут держави і права імені В.М. Корецького НАН України, Видавництво «Українська енциклопедія» імені М.П. Бажана. – К.: Укр. енцикл. − Т. 5: П-С. − 2003. – С. 560.

17. Ерохина Т. Соблюдение правил подсудности по делам, возникающим из публичных правоотношений, как гарантия права на судебную защиту / Т. Ерохина // Арбитражный и гражданский процесс. − 2006. − № 9. − С. 13-17.

18. Мегрелидзе М.Р. Становление института разрешения административно-правовых споров / Мегрелизде М.Р. − М. : ИД “Юриспруденция”, 2008. – С. 103.

19. Елистратов А.И. Основные начала административного права / Вступительное слово д.ю.н. В.В. Коноплева / Елистратов А.И. − Симферополь: из-во «Оригинал М», Крымский юридический институт Харьковского национального университета внутренних дел, 2007. − С. 145, 146.

20. Основи адміністративного судочинства та адміністративного права : Навч. посібник / [В.Б. Авер’янов, Н.В. Александрова, О.А. Банчук та ін.] / За заг. редакцією Куйбіди Р.О., Шишкіна В.І. – К. : Старий світ, 2006. – С. 105.

21. Єлістратов А.І. Адміністративне право: Лекції / Аркадій Іванович Єлістратов; ред. та упоряд. В.В. Галунько, С.В. Діденко. − Херсон: ВАТ «ХМД», 2007. − С. 59.

22. Про державну реєстрацію юридичних осіб та фізичних осіб − підприємців: Закон України від 15 травня 2003 року // Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 2003. − № 31-32. − Ст. 263.

23. Соловйова О.М. Організаційно-правові засади формування і діяльності відділів та управлінь місцевої державної адміністрації : Монографія / О.М. Соловйова. − Х. : Право, 2006. − С. 29.

24. Перепелюк В.Г. Адміністративний процес. Загальна частина : Навчальний посібник / Перепелюк В.Г. – [2-ге видання, змінене і доповнене]. − Київ : Центр навчальної літератури, 2004. − С. 12.

25. Бевзенко В.М. Публічно-правові відносини : сутність та ознаки / В.М. Бевзенко // Право і Безпека. − 2009. − № 1. − С. 6-12.

26. Цивільний кодекс України від 16 січня 2003 року № 435-IV // Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 2003. − № 40. − Ст. 356 Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 2003. − № 41. − Ст. 356; Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 2003. − № 42. − Ст. 356; Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 2003. − № 43. − Ст. 356; Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 2003. − № 44. − Ст. 356.

27. Исаченко В.Л. Основы гражданскаго процесса. Практическій комментарій основных положеній Устава гражданскаго судопроизводства / Исаченко В.Л.; [ (Ст. 1−28 дйствующаго устава и 1−36 ст. проекта новаго устава.) ; составил В.Л. Исаченко, Товарищ Обер-Прокурора Гражданскаго Касаціоннаго Департамента Правительствующаго Сената]. − С.-Петербург : Типографія М. Меркушева, Невскій пр., № 8, 1904. − С. 24.

28. Процессуальное право: Энциклопедический словарь / [Абова Т.Е., Бессарабов В.Г., Блажеев В.В. и др.]. − М.: Издательство НОРМА, 2003. − С. 439.

29. Комзюк А.Т. Заходи адміністративного примусу в правоохоронній діяльності міліції: поняття, види та організаційно-правові питання реалізації: Монографія / Комзюк А.Т. / За заг. ред. проф. О.М. Бандурки. − Харків : Вид-во Нац. ун-ту внутр. справ, 2002. − С. 25; Ивановский В.В. Учебник административного права (Полицейское право. Право внутренняго управленія) / Ивановский В.В. [профессор Казанского Университета]. − Казань : Типо-литографія Императорскаго Университета, 1904. − С. 201.

30. Бевзенко В.М. Поняття та ознаки державного регулювання / В.М. Бевзенко // Підприємництво, Господарство і Право. – 2006. – № 11. – С. 106-110.

31. Тихомиров Ю.А. Публичное право: Учебник / Тихомиров Ю.А. − М.: Издательство БЕК, 1995. − С. 32.

32. Про звернення громадян : Закон України від 2 жовтня 1996 року № 393/96-ВР // Відомості Верховної Ради України. − 1996. − № 47. − Ст. 256.

33. Великий енциклопедичний юридичний словник / [Авер’янов В.Б., Азаров Д.С., Акуленко В.І. та ін.]; За редакцією акад. НАН України Ю.С. Шемшученка. − К. : ТОВ «Видавництво «Юридична думка», 2007. − 992 с., с. 747.

34. Рішення Конституційного Суду України у справі за конституційним поданням Вищого адміністративного суду України щодо офіційного тлумачення положень частини першої статті 143 Конституції України, пунктів «а», «б», «в», «г» статті 12 Земельного кодексу України, пункту 1 частини першої статті 17 Кодексу адміністративного судочинства України від 1 квітня 2010 року № 10-рп/2010 // Вісник Конституційного Суду України. − 2010. − № 3. − Ст. 37.

35. Адміністративний процес: загальна частина (Федеративна Республіка Німеччини, Україна): Наук.-практ. посібник / Манн Томас, Мельник Роман, Бевзенко Володимир, Комзюк Анатолій; пер. та адапт. з нім. Мельника Романа; за заг. ред.. Бевзенка Володимира. – К.: Алерта, 2013, с. 304-306.