Argument zdravog razuma u upravnom sporu

master's thesis

• Author: Karen Dominić
• Mentor: Mateja Held (mentor)
• Committee member: Mateja Held (predsjednik povjerenstva)
• Committee member: Frane Staničić (član povjerenstva)
• Committee member: Marko Turudić (član povjerenstva)
• Granter: University of Zagreb; Faculty of Law; (Administrative Law); Zagreb
• Defense date and country: 2023-09-06, Croatia
• Scientific / art field, discipline and subdiscipline: SOCIAL SCIENCES; Law

Abstract

Rad je posvećen argumentu zdravog razuma u sudskoj praksi na temelju kojeg Ustavni sud odlukama ukida presude i rješenja upravnih sudova radi zaštite vladavine prava i ustavnih prava pojedinaca. U radu je predstavljena zaštita pojedinačnih prava i pravnih interesa putem zaštite upravnih sudova, Ustavnog suda i Vijeća Europe.
Pažnja je posvećena definiranju upravnog spora kao važne grane sudovanja u kojoj je važnost primjene argumenta zdravog razuma naročito naglašena. Također, u radu se razrađuje pitanje pravilnog i potpunog utvrđenja činjeničnog stanja te tumačenja i pravilne primjene materijalnog prava na konkretan društveni odnos, bez čega sudovi ne mogu donositi pravične odluke, odnosno presude i rješenja. Argument zdravog razuma zaživio je u ustavnosudskoj praksi s obzirom na to da se pravna pravila ne smiju mehanički primjenjivati na konkretne životne situacije te je potrebno u svakom pojedinom slučaju razmotriti kontekst. Navode se Ustavne odluke temeljene na argumentu zdravog razuma kao zaštite objektivnog pravnog poretka, te praksa upravnih sudova koji se u odlučivanju o konkretnom pitanju pozivaju na odluke Ustavnog suda.
Zaključkom se ukratko predstavljaju sve iznesene činjenice o sudskom nadzoru javne uprave, zaštiti ljudskih prava i temeljnih sloboda, odnosno donošenja zakonite odluke i ostvarivanja jamstva sudske kontrole zakonitosti pojedinačnih akata upravnih vlasti i tijela koje imaju javne ovlasti, te važnosti uniformnog tumačenja sudske prakse.

Abstract (english)

Summary
The paper is dedicated to the argument of common sense in judicial practice, on the basis of which the Constitutional Court annuls judgments and decisions of administrative courts in order to protect the rule of law and the constitutional rights of individuals. The paper presents the protection of individual rights and legal interests through the protection before administrative courts, the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights.
Attention is devoted to defining the administrative dispute as an important branch of litigation in which the importance of applying the argument of common sense is particularly emphasized. Also, the paper elaborates on the issue of correct and complete determination of the factual situation and interpretation and correct application of substantive law to a concrete social relationship, without which the courts cannot make fair decisions, i.e. verdicts and rulings. The argument of common sense has taken root in constitutional judicial practice, given that legal rules must not be mechanically applied to concrete life situations, and it is necessary to consider the context in each individual case. Constitutional decisions based on the argument of common sense as a protection of the objective legal order are cited, as well as the practice of administrative courts that refer to the decisions of the Constitutional Court when deciding on a specific issue.
The conclusion briefly presents all the presented facts about judicial supervision of public administration, the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, i.e. the adoption of a legal decision and the realization of a guarantee of judicial control of the legality of individual acts of administrative authorities and bodies that have public powers, and the importance of a uniform interpretation of judicial practice.

• Keywords: upravni spor; utvrđivanje činjeničnog stanja; tumačenje i primjena materijalnog prava; argument zdravog razuma; Ustavni sud; Europski sud za ljudska prava.
• Keywords (english): administrative dispute; determination of factual situation; interpretation and application of substantive law; argument of common sense; the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia; Eurpean Court of Human Rights.
• Language: croatian
• URN:NBN: urn:nbn:hr:199:439635
• Study programme: Title: Public administration; Study programme type: professional; Study level: specialist graduate; Academic / professional title: stručni/a specijalist/ specijalistica javne uprave (stručni/a specijalist/ specijalistica javne uprave)
• Type of resource: Text
• File origin: Born digital
• Access conditions: Open access
• Created on: 2023-09-13 06:10:22