Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/34617
Type of publication: Magistro darbas / Master thesis
Field of Science: Teisė / Law
Author(s): Dringelė, Lina
Title: Ar individualaus administracinio akto apskundimo terminasneprieštarauja Konstitucijai ir garantuoja asmeniui teisę į teisingą teismą,įtvirtintą Europos žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencijos 6 straipsnio 1 dalyje?
Other Title: Does the deadline of individual administrativeappeal act contradict to the Constitution and grants individual’s right to fair trial which is provided by European convention for the human rights and fundamental freedoms article 6 part 1?
Extent: 40 p.
Date: 2-Jun-2017
Event: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. Teisės fakultetas
Keywords: Procesinis terminas;Ieškinio senatis;Terminas skundui pateikti;Konvencija;Teisė į teisminę gynybą;Procedural deadline;Period of limitation;Deadline lodging complaints;Convention;Right to judicial protection
Abstract: Lietuvos Respublikos Administracinių bylų teisenos įstatymo 29 straipsnio 1 dalyje įtvirtintas skundo padavimo termino institutas. Skundo padavimo termino institutas yra asmens teisė į teisminę gynybą įgyvendinimo forma. Lietuvoje įstatymas reglamentuoja vieno mėnesio terminą skundui paduoti. Todėl neretai praktikoje susiduriama su problema, kad asmuo praleidęs terminą skundui paduoti bet pateisinamų priežasčių, neturi teisės kreiptis į teismą ir ginti savo teisėtus interesus. Teismas vienašališkai vertina skundo termino praleidimas priežastis. Todėl iš skundo pateikimo termino instituto įgyvendinimo kyla klausimas – ar skundo padavimo terminas užtikrina konstitucinio principo teisė į teisminę gynybą įgyvendinimą ir neprieštarauja Europos žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencijoje įtvirtintam principui – teisė į teisingą teismą. Pirmoje darbo dalyje, remiantis įvairia moksline literatūra, siekiant atskleisti skundo padavimo termino instituto teisinę prigimtį, analizuojama materialinių ir procesinių terminų panašumai ir skirtumai, ieškinio senaties ir skundo padavimo termino institutų panašumai ir skirtumai. Antroje darbo dalyje, remiantis Konstitucinio Teismo jurisprudencija ir moksline literatūra, siekta atskleisti, ar teisė į teisminę gynybą yra absoliuti, ar skundo padavimo termino instituto įgyvendinimas neprieštarauja Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucijai. Trečioje darbo dalyje, remiantis Europos Žmogaus Teisių Teismo praktika ir moksline literatūra, siekta atskleisti, ar teisė į teisingą teismą yra absoliuti teisė. Taip pat, ar skundo padavimo termino instituto įgyvendinimas neprieštarauja Europos žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencijos 6 straipsnio 1 dalyje įtvirtintam principui teisė į teisminę gynybą. Ketvirtoje darbo dalyje, remiantis Latvijos, Estijos ir Prancūzijos teisiniu reglamentavimu, siekta atskleisti, kaip yra įgyvendinama skundo padavimo termino institutas, kokie yra terminai skundui paduoti ir kokia terminų teisinė prigimtis. Atlikus analizę, išsiaiškinta, kad principai, konstitucinis principas teisė į teisminę gynybą ir Konvencijos principas teisė į teisingą teismą, nėra absoliutūs, ir juos gali riboti įstatymai, t.y. įstatymo leidėjas gali nustatyti formalius kreipimosi į teismą reikalavimus. Taip pat skundo padavimo termino teisinė prigimtis yra procesinė, todėl šio termino tikslas yra užtikrinti teisinių santykių stabilumą, operatyvų bylų nagrinėjimą, realią ir garantuojama subjektinių teisių ir įstatymo saugomų interesų teisminę gynybą.
In Lithuania, Administrative Procedure Law provides one of the personal rights form - Institute of deadline for filing a complaint the right to justice is enshrined in the Constitution of Lithuania 30 article 1, based on that person whose constitutional rights and freedoms are violated has the right to go to court. The Jurisprudence of The Constitutional Court has ruled that violated human rights and legal interests have to be defended regardless their direct recognitions in the constitution. The institute of deadline for filing a complaint is a person's right to a judicial remedy in the form of implementation. Lithuania is regulated by the Law that has the short term for filing a complaint. That is why often there is a problem when a person who missed deadline for filing a complaint without good reason, has no right to go to court and defend their legitimate interests. Therefore based on regulation the question arises - as to whether complain filing period ensures the constitutional principle of the right to judicial protection and consistent implementation of the European Convention of Human Rights enshrined the principle – the right to a fair trial. Legislator has established a one-month time limit for lodging a complaint. Therefore, legal practice faces a problem when a person who has missed the deadline for filing a complaint, without good reason, loses the right to go to court and defend their legitimate interests. This raises questions about the complaint filing deadline legal nature, whether this term is similar to the civil law enshrined limitation Institute and what the similarities and differences between institutions are. Also there are questions regarding the Constitutional principle of right to the content of judicial protection, the Convention principle of right to a fair trial content and application. Therefore, it can be said that the subject is problematic. Any person, whose legitimate interests have been violated, has the right to legal defense. However, the question arises as how to protect the legitimate interests of the person affected, if a person misses time limit for lodging a complaint, without good reason, and is deprived of the right to legal defense. This right is guaranteed in the Constitution, it is therefore necessary to reveal whether or not the implementation of complaint filing deadline, which is a form of implementation of the right to judicial protection violates the right of constitutional principle to judicial protection and the of the right of Convention principle to a fair trial. Work hypothesis. The implementation of the Institute of Complaint filing deadline violates the Constitution enshrined the principle of the right to judicial protection and in the Convention enshrined the principle of the right to a fair trial. The analysis of Master's thesis did not prove a hypothesis, that the implementation of the Institute of complaint filing deadline violates the Constitution enshrined the principle of the right to judicial protection and the Convention enshrined the principle of the right to a fair trial. This conclusion follows from the analysis and interpretations of the Constitutional and Human Rights Courts, which established the constitutional right to a trial and the Convention enshrined the right to a fair trial is not absolute, therefore the legislator has the right to determine the procedure for applying to the courts, formal requirements. The job analysis showed that: 1. The deadline for filing Complaint in its legal nature is a procedural deadline because its goal – is to ensure rapid and efficient proceedings, the real and guaranteed subjective rights and judicial defense of legally protected interests; limit for proceedings to carry out in connection with the protection of the violated or disputed substantive law to carry out; term has a mandatory attribute; the time limits specified by law or determined by the court; the term is short, since the aim is to ensure the timely judicial settlement of the dispute. 2. Administrative Proceedings Law Article 29, Paragraph 1, which has one month to file a complaint, is in compliance with the Constitution Article 30 Paragraph 1. Because based on the Constitutional Court's interpretation the legislator of procedural laws may establish a referral to a court order, the formal requirements to be met by the court for a procedural document. Such formal requirements shall not imply that the person is artificially restricted the constitutional right of access to a court or unduly burdened exercise of this right. 3. Administrative Proceedings Law Article 29, Paragraph 1, which has one month to file a complaint, is in compliance with The Convention article 6 Paragraph 1. According to the European Human Rights Court's interpretation, the right to a trial is not an absolute right and national law may be introduced into the appeal court rules, e.g., the limitation, fines payment rules, etc. 4. In Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and France, the complaint filing deadline falls within the procedural deadline. The deadlines are regulated in Latvia and Estonia by procedural law - Administrative Procedure Act. Complaint filing deadlines are short, Latvia and Estonia one month, France - two months. However, Latvia is provided with the case that if administrative act is in breach of the legitimate interests of the person who was not an administrative process party, then the person has the right to file a complaint within one month of becoming aware, but not longer than one year, from the time when an administrative act came into force.
Internet: https://eltalpykla.vdu.lt/1/34617
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/34617
Appears in Collections:2017 m. (TF mag.)

Files in This Item:
lina_dringele_md.pdf674.11 kBAdobe PDF   Restricted AccessView/Open

Show full item record

Page view(s)

118
checked on Nov 5, 2019

Download(s)

10
checked on Nov 5, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.