LEGAL FICTIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COURTS

Author:

Barikova Anna1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. National Academy of Internal Affairs

Abstract

Goal. The paper reveals features of applying administrative procedural legal fictions in order to avoid abuse of the right and evasion of the law when exercising procedural discretion. Methods. For achievement of research purposes, the author uses special legal methods of scientific knowledge: formal-logical, system-functional, formal-logical, comparative-legal. Results. Historiography of the legal fictions use has been dealt with. Essence of fictions has been highlighted in the paper as legal anomalies. The use of legal fictions in the administrative process has been detailed, taking into account the Grundnorm theory. The connection between legal fictions and legal regulations has been revealed. The legal fiction has been described as a reinterpretation of the facts of an event in order to make these facts compatible with the rule, and at the same time allowing to get the correct result. This is a type of legal fiction-reinterpreting X (or class X) as Y in order to avoid an “inconvenient”, unreliable, false, etc. result for the purposes of the law. As a rule, it is recognized that X is not Y. That is, the court considers the creation of a fiction as a legitimate action within the framework of the judicial process; the activity that could be performed without concealment as a discretely true category. Case law on the application of legal fictions has been described. It has been advised to use legal fictions when considering and resolving disputes, provided that there are false or clearly erroneous judgments in the provisions of existing applicable legal rules. As a consequence, time and resource costs for clarifying the facts of the case and over-motivating the judgment are minimized. Conclusions. Firstly, features of legal fictions have been highlighted, in particular, for achieving the goals and objectives of administrative proceedings. Secondly, the classification of arguments, methods and approaches to the application of such atypical regulators in the administrative process has been proposed by the “meta” degree: 1) on the fundamental metric – internal, or zero-order arguments; 2) at the derivative definitive level – by defining functional, structural and relative concepts.

Publisher

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

Reference80 articles.

1. Alekseev, S.S. (1982). General theory of law: in 2 vol. Moscow: Legal literature. Vol. 2, pp. 52, 277 [Алексеев С.С. Общая теория права : в 2 т. Москва : Юридическая литература, 1982. Т. 2. 286 с.].

2. Babaev, V.K. (1974). Presumption in Soviet law: tutorial. Gorky: Gorky Higher School of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR, pp. 28 [Бабаев В.К. Презумпции в советском праве : учебное пособие. Горький : Горьковская высшая школа МВД СССР, 1974. 124 с.].

3. Barak, A. (1999). Judicial discretion (transl. from English). Moscow: NORMA, pp. 111, 309 [Барак А. Судейское усмотрение. Пер. с англ. Москва : НОРМА, 1999. 376 с.].

4. Barihin, A.B. (compl.) (2000). Great legal encyclopaedic dictionary. Moscow: INFRA-M, pp. 405 [Большой юридический энциклопедический словарь / сост. А.Б. Барихин. Москва : ИНФРА-М, 2000. 719 с.].

5. Bevzenko, V.M. (2012). Fictions in the administrative process and administrative procedural law of Ukraine. Administrative law and process, no. 2(2), pp. 99–108 [Бевзенко В.М. Фікції в адміністративному процесі й адміністративному процесуальному праві України. Адміністративне право і процес. 2012. № 2(2). С. 99–108].

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3