Meeting at the Crossroads: A Comparative Study of the Hungarian and Finnish Legal Remedy System in Administrative Law

Krisztina F. Rozsnyai, Krisztián Kis

Abstract


We can find mechanisms in every legal system for addressing the eventual breaches of law caused by the activities of public administration. The classical aspect of this issue is the creation of different legal remedy procedures against administrative decisions. Legal remedies can be divided into two main types: internal remedies and the judicial review of administrative acts. Although the core purpose of these procedures is the same, they are not identical neither in their functions nor in their outcomes. Finding the right balance between them can be a difficult task and result in different answers. To demonstrate this and outline some basic questions of the construction of a remedy system, the paper chose two prime examples of this divergence, Hungary and Finland. The regulations on the remedy systems of these two countries put different emphasis on the role of internal remedies and of judicial review, as well as on the ex officio investigation powers of judges which is strongly connected to this equilibrium. The two legislatures have followed different paths: in Hungary the internal remedies, which used to be available more widely have been gradually reduced, meanwhile in Finland internal remedies, which were initially exceptional, are becoming more and more widespread. Comparative legal and dogmatic methods were used in the research, which led to the appropriate contextualisation of the legal instruments and allowed for conclusions regarding not only the two administrative remedy systems, but the basic elements of remedy systems in general as well as their interdependencies.


Keywords


administrative remedies; judicial review; Finland; Hungary; comparative administrative law

Full Text:

PDF

References


LITERATURE

Buijze A., Langbroek P.M., Remac M., Designing Administrative Pre-Trial Proceedings, Utrecht 2013.

Csink L., Varga Zs.A., The Ombudsman, [in:] Hungarian Public Administration and Administrative Law, eds. A. Patyi, Á. Rixer, Passau 2014.

Hoffman I., Balázs I., Administrative Law in the Time of Corona(virus): Resiliency of the Hungarian Administrative Law?, “Studia Iuridica Lublinensia” 2021, vol. 30(1), DOI: https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2021.30.1.103-119.

Hoffman I., Papp M., Varju M., Can EU Law and the Right to Effective Judicial Protection Rescue Judicial Review in Hungary?, “European Public Law” 2023, vol. 29(3), DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/EURO2023013.

Husa J., Panorama of World’s Legal Systems – Focusing on Finland, [in:] Introduction to Finnish Law and Legal Culture, eds. K. Nuotio, S. Melander, M. Huomo-Kettunen, Helsinki 2012.

Kis K., A közigazgatási jogorvoslati rendszer átalakítása: hangsúlyeltolódások, [in:] Jogászegyleti Értekezések 2022, ed. B. Bodzási, Budapest 2022.

Kovács A., The Curia’s Tasks in the Code of Administrative Court Procedure, “Annales Universitatis Scientiarum Budapestinensis de Rolando Eötvös Nominatae – Sectio Iuridica” 2018, DOI: https://doi.org/10.56749/annales.elteajk.2018.lvii.2.15.

Lavapuro J., Constitutional Review in Finland, [in:] Introduction to Finnish Law and Legal Culture, eds. K. Nuotio, S. Melander, M. Huomo-Kettunen, Helsinki 2012.

Lavapuro J., Ojanen T., Scheinin M., Rights-Based Constitutionalism in Finland and the Development of Pluralist Constitutional Review, “International Journal of Constitutional Law” 2011, vol. 9(2), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mor035.

Mäenpää O., Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review in Finland, [in:] Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review: Comparative Perspectives, ed. G. Zhu, Cham 2019, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31539-9_9.

Mäenpää O., The Rule of Law and Administrative Implementation in Finland, [in:] Introduction to Finnish Law and Legal Culture, eds. K. Nuotio, S. Melander, M. Huomo-Kettunen, Helsinki 2012.

Paloniitty T., Kangasmaa S., Securing Scientific Understanding: Expert Judges in Finnish Environmental Administrative Judicial Review, “European Energy and Environmental Law Review” 2018, vol. 27(4), DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/EELR2018015.

Patyi A., A magyar közigazgatási bíráskodás elmélete és története, Budapest 2019.

Rennert K., Administration, Administrative Jurisdiction and Separation of Powers, “ELTE Law Journal” 2018, no. 1.

Rozsnyai K.F., Current Tendencies of Judicial Review as Reflected in the New Hungarian Code of Administrative Court Procedure, “Central European Public Administration Review” 2019, vol. 17(1), DOI: https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2019.1.01.

Rozsnyai K.F., Judicial Review in Hungary: The Turmoil of Organisational Changes Through the Lenses of Procedural Law, “ELTE Law Journal” 2023, no. 1, DOI: https://doi.org/10.54148/ELTELJ.2023.1.95.

Rozsnyai K.F., The Procedural Autonomy of Hungarian Administrative Justice as a Precondition of Effective Judicial Protection, “Studia Iuridica Lublinensia” 2021, vol. 30(4), DOI: https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2021.30.4.491-503.

Szalai É., A fellebbezési eljárás, [in:] Közigazgatási jog – Általános rész III., ed. M. Fazekas, Budapest 2021.

Szente Z., Conceptualising the Principle of Effective Legal Protection in Administrative Law, [in:] The Principle of Effective Legal Protection in Administrative Law: A European Comparison, eds. Z. Szente, K. Lachmayer, London 2016, DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315553979-3.

Varga Zs.A., Public Administration and the Prosecution Service, [in:] Hungarian Public Administration and Administrative Law, eds. A. Patyi, Á. Rixer, Passau 2014.

ONLINE SOURCES

Finnish Ministry of the Justice, Government Report on Administration on Justice, 2023, https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/164658/VN_2023_9.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y (access: 25.11.2023).

Petrétei J., Hatalommegosztás, [in:] Internetes Jogtudományi Enciklopédia, eds. A. Jakab, B. Fekete, 2018, http://ijoten.hu/szocikk/alkotmanyjog-hatalommegosztas (access: 26.8.2024).

LEGAL ACTS

Hungarian law

Act XX of 1949 on the Constitution of the Hungarian Republic.

Act III of 1952 on the Civil Procedure Code.

Act CL of 2016 on the Code of General Administrative Procedure.

Act I of 2017 on the Code of Administrative Court Procedure.

Act CLI of 2017 on the Tax Procedure Code.

Act XXV of 2023 on Complaints and Whistleblowing.

Hungarian Fundamental Law.

Finnish law

Act on Taxation Procedure (1558/1995).

Act on Administrative Judicial Procedure (586/1996).

Act on Administrative Procedure (434/2003).

Act on Social Welfare (1301/2014).

Act on Amendment of the Administrative Procedure (893/2015).

Act on Local Government (410/2015).

Act on Administrative Judicial Procedure (808/2019).

Act on Wellbeing Services Counties (611/2021).

Constitution of Finland.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/sil.2024.33.3.133-155
Date of publication: 2024-09-27 21:28:14
Date of submission: 2024-03-02 20:59:05


Statistics


Total abstract view - 46
Downloads (from 2020-06-17) - PDF - 0

Indicators



Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Krisztina F. Rozsnyai, Krisztián Kis

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.