Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Бєлкін, Леонід Михайлович; Університет розвитку людини «Україна» (2015)
Publisher: Національний Авиаційний Університет
Languages: Ukrainian
Types: Unknown
Subjects: акт ненормативного характера; неограниченный круг лиц; акт индивидуального действия; принцип правовой определенности; Суд ЕС, 342.924, non-regulatory act; general public; an act of individual action; the principle of legal certainty; the Court of Justice, акт ненормативного характеру; необмежене коло осіб; акт індивідуальної дії; принцип правової певності; Суд ЄС
Analyzes the legal position of administrative courts of Ukraine on judicial review of acts of non-normative nature. It is noted that the subject of authority tend to give non-normative acts of nature, which although not be enforceable in practice the relevant public authorities, often contrary to law. Nenormatyvnist these acts casts doubt on the possibility of judicial review, since it is believed that they do not directly affect the rights of private law. The above contradiction makes no established jurisprudence, the manifestation of trends to refuse such a review on the grounds of lack of violated rights of the plaintiff. However, in practice this position is illegal. It is noted that the presence of such dubious clarification creates a state of legal uncertainty for recipients of guidelines, because they either have to use them, and then it directly violates their rights, or their own, at their own risk, ignore the following explanation, the risk of getting under penalty. Creating a state of legal uncertainty is itself a violation of human persons. We give positive jurisprudence. In particular, the Court noted that the appeal of the plaintiff in court is reasonable behavior aimed at preventing violation of his rights in the future taking of the tax authority measures, the purpose of the applicant when applying to the court is quite clear and is related to his legitimate rights and interests in relations with tax authorities. Analysis of the position of the Court of Justice shows that in fact the Court of Justice accepted the general concept that any statement on the planned Community institution of actions in certain circumstances is considered an act subject to review, provided that his statement is clear and specific in nature. No matter the fact that the institution is not legally bound such statement. Of course, it is desirable that persons whose interests are affected, could verify that the planned legal action and that they can proceed from the assumption that the government has in mind is what she said. So while a statement of intent, strictly speaking, can not be considered a legal act, it is desirable that he interpreted as such in the absence of provision for claim for declaration. Аналізуються правові позиції адміністративних судів України щодо судового перегляду актів ненормативного характеру. Наголошується на відсутності усталеної судової практики та тенденцій щодо відмови у такому перегляді з мотивів відсутності порушених прав позивача. Показано, що така позиція не відповідає позиції, що вироблена Судом ЄС. Анализируются правовые позиции административных судов Украины относительно судебного пересмотра актов ненормативного характера. Отмечается отсутствие устоявшейся судебной практики и тенденций об отказе в таком пересмотре по мотивам отсутствия нарушенных прав истца. Показано, что такая позиция не соответствует позиции, выработанной судом ЕС.
  • No references.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.