First of all, a judicial review is drawn up in order to file an appeal against a negative decision for an item. Other rejected items can be added to the new judicial review. The addition of another item to a judicial review means that this item must be taken into account at the hearing taking place for the judicial review. Any additional post added to a judicial review could potentially come from a different complainant.
Judicial reviews on contradictions can be drawn up only for problem cases for which there is an approved solution. For more information on problem solving, see the IBM Cúram Issue Management Guide.
When drawing up a judicial review, the user enters the applicant and the counterparty of the objection, as well as the details of the objection. The details of the objection include, for example, the estimated level of difficulty and the reason for the objection, any emergency situation associated with the objection (e.g. an impending eviction) and information on whether the complainant wishes to continue the service during the objection, as well as important dates. The date of receipt of the application for objection by the organization is also recorded. If the judicial review is drawn up for a rejected item, the date when the original decision on the objected item became valid is also indicated. If the judicial review is drawn up for a problem case, the date when the solution to the problem was approved is recorded.
If the organization acts as an applicant, the owner of the judicial review case may request the printout of a court application as part of the preparation of an objection. This court application can be attached to the opposition of the “Judicial review” type as an appendix. The application can then be completed and submitted to the court.
If the organization is not the applicant, the judicial review case is drawn up only after the organization has been informed by the court that the applicant has filed an objection. The party to the case receives a notification that a case of objection of the “Judicial review” type has been drawn up.
Discretionary decisions of an authority can only be reviewed in court to a limited extent. According to § 114 S. 1 VwGO, the review by the courts of the discretion exercised by the authority is limited to the question of whether the administrative act or the refusal or omission of the administrative act is unlawful,
because the legal limits of discretion have been exceeded (error of discretion)
the discretion has been exercised in a manner that does not correspond to the purpose of the authorization (discretion – expediency).
Consequently, in this review of legality, the courts may not exercise their own discretion or make a decision on expediency. This competence must not be taken away from the authority. Rather, the court is limited to the review of errors of discretion or a reduction of discretion to zero.
In opposition proceedings, on the other hand, the legality and expediency of the administrative act must be checked by the opposition authority. The justification of the notice of objection must therefore contain its own discretionary decision.
In the case of limited judicial control (scope for assessment), on the other hand, it may only be checked whether the indefinite legal concept has been interpreted correctly by the authority. Only if errors are detected, the official decision may be objected to and classified as unlawful.
What is the concept of judicial review?
What is judicial review and give an example?
What is judicial review quizlet?
Why is the judicial review important?