Spremenjena praksa izdajanja začasnih odredb v upravnem sporu

Martinčič, Gala (author), Žuber, Bruna (mentor), Lovšin, Špela (comentor)

Magistrsko delo obravnava začasne odredbe v upravnem sporu in ureditev tega pravnega instituta v zakonodaji in sodni praksi, s poudarkom na spremembi sodne prakse, do katere je prišlo s sklepom Vrhovnega sodišča Republike Slovenije v zadevi I Up 109/2022 z dne 8. 6. 2022. Spremembe v sodni praksi so bile tako formalne, glede dokaznega postopka in materialnega procesnega vodstva, kot tudi vsebinske, glede pravnega standarda težko popravljive škode, predvsem na davčnem področju. Uvodoma so opredeljeni vsebina in namen instituta začasne odredbe v upravnem sporu ter njegovo razlikovanje od začasnih odredb v civilnem pravu. Nadalje je opisana pravna ureditev začasnih odredb v upravnem sporu v Republiki Sloveniji in v izbranih evropskih državah, in sicer v Zvezni republiki Nemčiji, Republiki Avstriji in Republiki Hrvaški. Glavni del magistrskega dela pa se osredotoča na sodno prakso glede začasnih odredb v upravnem sporu, kakšna je bila praksa pred in po spremembi s sklepom Vrhovnega sodišča Republike Sloveniji v zadevi I Up 109/2022 z dne 8. 6. 2022 ter kakšna je vsebina tega sklepa. Na podlagi internih podatkov Upravnega sodišča Republike Slovenije glede števila prejetih zahtev, načina rešitve zahteve in števila vloženih pritožb zoper odločitve o začasnih odredbah pred in po spremembi sodne prakse sem v tem delu potrdila hipotezo magistrskega dela, da je zaradi spremembe sodne prakse glede začasnih odredb v upravnem sporu danes izdanih več začasnih odredb, kar omogoča tožnikom bolj učinkovito sodno varstvo v upravnem sporu. V zadnjem delu je vsebovana tudi de lege ferenda ureditev začasnih odredb v upravnem sporu. Začasna odredba v upravnem sporu je institut, s katerim lahko sodišče poseže v pravno učinkovanje izdanega upravnega akta tako, da zadrži njegovo izvrševanje ali začasno uredi sporno razmerje. Institut zakonsko ureja le en člen – 32. člen Zakona o upravnem sporu, zato je večji del pravil glede odločanja o začasni odredbi vzpostavilo sodišče v sodni praksi, ki pa je k zahtevam pristopalo zelo restriktivno. Ob dejstvu, da je namen začasne odredbe v upravnem sporu zagotovitev učinkovitega sodnega varstva, ki ga zagotavlja 23. člen Ustave Republike Slovenije, saj ta želi preprečiti, da bi do končne odločitve sodišča v upravnem sporu tožniku nastala težko popravljiva škoda, je zelo restriktivna razlaga lahko problematična in ustavno sporna.

• Language: Slovenian
• Keywords: začasna odredba, upravni spor, učinkovito sodno varstvo, upravno pravo
• Work type: Master's thesis/paper
• Organization: PF - Faculty of Law
• Year: 2024
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-159752
• COBISS.SI-ID: 203282179
• Publication date in RUL: 23.07.2024

Secondary language

• Language: English
• Title: Changed Practice of Issuing Interim Measures in Administrative Disputes

Abstract

Master's thesis discusses interim measures in administrative disputes and the regulation of this legal institute in legislation and judicial practice, with an emphasis on the change in judicial practice that occurred with the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia in case I Up 109/2022 on 8. 6. 2022. The changes in judicial practice were both formal, regarding the evidentiary procedure and substantive procedural guidance, as well as substantive, concerning the legal standard of hard-to-repair damage, especially in the tax area. The introduction defines the content and purpose of interim measures in administrative disputes and distinguishes them from interim measures in civil law. Further, the legal regulation of interim measures in administrative disputes in the Republic of Slovenia and selected European countries, namely the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Austria, and the Republic of Croatia, is described. The main part of the thesis focuses on the judicial practice regarding interim measures in administrative disputes, examining the practice before and after the change with the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia in case I Up 109/2022 on 8. 6. 2022, and the content of this decision. Based on internal data from the Administrative Court of the Republic of Slovenia regarding the number of received requests, the manner of resolving the requests, and the number of appeals against decisions on interim measures before and after the change in judicial practice, I confirmed the hypothesis of the master's thesis that due to the change in judicial practice, more interim measures are issued, which allows plaintiffs more effective judicial protection in administrative disputes. The final part of the thesis also includes the de lege ferenda regulation of interim measures in administrative disputes. An interim measure in an administrative dispute is an institute through which the court can intervene in the legal effect of an issued administrative act by suspending its execution or temporarily regulating the disputed relationship. The institute is regulated by only one article – Article 32 of the Administrative Dispute Act, so most of the rules regarding the decision on interim measures have been established by the court in judicial practice, which approached the requirements extremely restrictively. Given that the purpose of an interim measure in an administrative dispute is to ensure effective judicial protection, guaranteed by Article 23 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia, as it seeks to prevent the plaintiff from suffering hard-to-repair damage until the court's final decision in the administrative dispute, an extremely restrictive interpretation can be problematic and constitutionally questionable.

• Keywords: interim measure, administrative dispute, effective judicial protection, administrative law