Przedmiot badań: Przedmiotem badań jest instytucja tymczasowego pełnomocnika szczególnego, ustanawianego w postępowaniu podatkowym na zasadach przewidzianych w art. 138l-138n Ordynacji podatkowej (w ...szczególności zakres i przesłanki jego umocowania, tryb wyznaczania oraz funkcjonowanie tymczasowych pełnomocników szczególnych, będących przedstawicielami zawodów zaufania publicznego w Polsce w latach 2017-2021). Cel badawczy: Celem badawczym jest ustalenie ratio legis instytucji tymczasowego pełnomocnika szczególnego oraz jego roli i „kompetencji" w postępowaniu podatkowym, jak również ocena funkcjonowania tej instytucji w Polsce w latach 2017-2021, z wykorzystaniem badań empirycznych. Metoda badawcza: W pracy wykorzystano co do zasady metodę teoretycznoprawną i dogmatycznoprawną (polegające na analizie uregulowań prawnych zawartych w Ordynacji podatkowej, a także komentarzy, monografii, artykułów oraz orzecznictwa sądów administracyjnych). Ponadto, dokonano interpretacji zgromadzonego materiału empirycznego, pozyskanego od organów samorządów zawodowych (doradców podatkowych, adwokatów oraz radców prawnych). Wyniki: Instytucję tymczasowego pełnomocnika szczególnego, pomimo zaledwie kilku lat funkcjonowania i tymczasowego charakteru, uznać należy za istotną i potrzebną, ponieważ stanowi ona gwarancję należytej reprezentacji osób nieobecnych, co jest przejawem zasady czynnego udziału strony w postępowaniu podatkowym. Liczba zawodowych tymczasowych pełnomocników szczególnych w latach 2017-2021 systematycznie rosła, co należy ocenić pozytywnie. Najliczniejszą grupę w tym zakresie stanowili w badanych latach radcy prawni. Można założyć, że zaobserwowana tendencja wzrostowa zostanie utrzymana.
BECOMING THE ADMINISTRATOR-IN-CHIEF Katz, Andrea Scoseria; Rosenblum, Noah A.
Columbia law review,
12/2023, Letnik:
123, Številka:
8
Journal Article
Recenzirano
In a series of recent cases, the Supreme Court has reconfigured the administrative state in line with a particular version of Article II. According to the Court’s scheme, known as the theory of the ...“unitary executive,” all of the government’s operations must be housed under one of three branches, with the head of the executive branch shouldering unique and personal responsibility for the administration of federal law.
Guiding the Court’s decisions is Myers v. United States, the famous 1926 case about the firing of a postman. Written by Presidentturned–Chief Justice William Howard Taft, Myers is used to bolster the Court’s jurisprudence as a supposed precedent for the unitary executive theory and an alleged originalist defense of strong executive administration.
This Article shows that Myers has been misread. It did not explicate a preexisting tradition of presidential power; it invented one. Claiming to describe the presidency as it had always been, Taft’s opinion broke with decades of jurisprudence to constitutionalize a new understanding of the office. This “Progressive Presidency,” which (President) Taft himself helped create, made the President the administrator-in-chief on developmental, not originalist, grounds as part of a broader Progressive remaking of government. And it differed from its modern-day unitary counterpart in many important particulars, including respect for administrative independence.
Relación conclusiva Santamaría Pastor, Juan Alfonso
Revista de administración pública (Madrid),
12/2021, Letnik:
216, Številka:
216
Journal Article
For the fourth time, members of the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court and professors of Administrative Law have met (October 2021) to debate a new set of issues that affect key aspects of the ...administrative legal system. To date, the management of the magazine and the presidency of the Chamber have chosen, with undoubted success, topics of a very general scope: the situation of the new appeal that began its journey in 2017, the invalidity of the regulations due to procedural defects ( with special attention to urban planning instruments), and the non-contractual responsibility of the Administration.
We provide a conceptual map of judicial independence and evaluate the content, construct, and convergent validity of 13 cross-national measures. There is evidence suggesting the validity of extant de ...facto measures, though their proper use requires attention to correlated patterns of measurement error and missing data. The evidence for the validity of extant de jure measures is weaker. Among other findings, we do not observe a strong and direct link between the rules that allegedly promote judicial independence and independent behavior. The results suggest that while the measurement of both de jure and de facto judicial independence requires a careful strategy for measuring latent concepts, the way that scholars should address this issue depends on whether they are targeting the incentives for independent behavior induced by formal rules or independent behavior itself.
Judicial independence for the lower courts, especially at the magisterial level, is often disregarded, be it administratively or in academic studies. Shortcomings in the independence of the Malaysian ...magistracy, though apparent, were never systematically evaluated against the judicial independence benchmarks. By using the Brisbane Declaration 2018, a Commonwealth Magistrates' and Judges' Association (CMJA) established instrument that prescribed standards of independence for the magistracies, this article briefly assesses the state of magisterial independence in Malaysia. The analysis confirms that institutional independence, adjudicatory independence and administrative independence of the Malaysian magistracy have been compromised. Certain essential formal safeguards of judicial independence are also absent. This lack of magisterial independence is mainly attributable to the complexity of the courts' administrative structure that exists as a hybrid framework between the Executive and the Judicature. Hence, further in-depth study of this matter is required to preserve the dignity, integrity, impartiality and independence of the Malaysian magistracy.
This article focuses on the personal liability of managers of undertakings for breaches of competition law. This article starts with a review of the sanction regime for managers of undertakings ...according to the Competition law of the Republic of Lithuania. Reviewed are legal provisions and judicial practice of the Lithuanian courts starting from 2017, that is, when the first request to sanction a manager of an undertaking was submitted to the court by the Competition Council (CC). It is pointed out that in most cases the courts do not fully accept the requests of the CC with respect to the severity of the sanctions to be imposed on managers. The second part of the Article comprehensively analyses the case-law of administrative courts of the Republic of Lithuania, and presents key elements of the imposition of sanctions on company managers. Firstly, in exceptional circumstances, courts may impose a lower penalty than the one specified by competition law. Secondly, the courts may impose both, the main sanction as well as an additional one, or any of them. Thirdly, the level of sanctions should be determined the light of the fines imposed on undertakings for their infringements of competition law. The article concludes with a short summary.
Judges take part in a variety of non-adjudicative tasks that shape the structure of litigation. In addition to their managerial functions, judges sit as administrative heads of court. They ...participate in civil justice reform projects and develop procedures for criminal and civil trials. What norms and principles ought to guide judges in this other work? In their casework we expect judges to be neutral and fair, setting aside politics and rationally following the law. Indeed, this article will demonstrate that there is good reason to insist on these qualities in both judges' case-related and broader court-related reform activities. To test this proposition, this article examines the work of judges who sat on the Advisory Committee for Civil Rules, the committee that evaluates and makes recommendations for rule amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In particular, this Article reviews the committee's nearly thirty-year effort to make rules for approving settlements in mass tort class actions. The review reveals politics and competition not only between judges and Congress for the authority to design rules of procedure, but also points to a lesser explored phenomenon, of competition between judges of the different levels of court.
This Essay suggests an underappreciated, appropriate, and conceptually coherent structure to the Chevron relationship of courts to agencies, grounded in the concept of "allocation." Because the term ..."deference" muddles rather than clarifies the structure's operation, this Essay avoids speaking of "Chevron deference" and "Skidmore deference." Rather, it argues, one could more profitably think in terms of "Chevron space" and "Skidmore weight." "Chevron space" denotes the area within which an administrative agency has been statutorily empowered to act in a manner that creates legal obligations or constraints—that is, its allocated authority. "Skidmore weight" addresses the possibility that an agency's view on a given statutory question may in itself warrant the respect of judges who are themselves unmistakably responsible for deciding the question of statutory meaning. "Skidmore weight" has an underappreciated pedigree. For almost two centuries, American courts have given agency views of statutory meaning considerable weight in deciding for themselves issues of statutory meaning. "Chevron space" reflects our more recent understanding and acceptance that Congress may validly confer on executive agencies the authority to act with the force of law, so long as the legality of their action within the boundaries of their authority can be judicially assured. Within its congressionally authorized space, the agency is the prime actor. From a court's independent conclusion that Congress has delegated authority to an agency—a conclusion that may even be informed by Skidmore weight given to the agency's own understandings of its authority—it follows ineluctably that the reviewing court is to act, not as decider, but as overseer.
On 30 March 2023, the European Court of Justice ruled for the first time on the interpretation of Article 88 GDPR, which gives Member States the power to provide for more specific rules on employee ...data processing. In response to a request from the Administrative Court of Wiesbaden ('Hauptpersonalrat der Lehrerinnen') concerning the live streaming of video classes, the CJEU found the German law regulating personal data processing in the employment context to be incompatible with the GDPR. This note examines the far-reaching implications of the ruling, not least given that similar provisions have been enacted at the state and federal levels in Germany as well as in several other Member States. It further identifies guidelines for the appropriate use of Article 88. Notably, national laws making use of Article 88 GDPR must provide normative content that is distinct from, but compatible with, the GDPR.
PDF
