Administrative rulemaking and planning is an under-studied and under-theorized area of public law. To better understand how administrative functions and powers are discharged by public authorities and private bodies, this seventh volume in the Common Core of European Administrative Law series argues that we must consider all forms of administrative action, not just formal procedures and judicial review. As such, greater attention needs to be paid to administrative rulemaking and planning, which have a significant impact on economics and society.Through extensive comparative research, this book examines this increasingly important field of administrative law. It focuses mainly on Europe, analysing ten national systems including eight European Union member states, Norway, and the UK, but it also explores the legal systems of the United States and China, as well as that of a non-state entity - the European Union itself.The questions investigated across these systems include whether administrative agencies may fetter their discretion through policy and rules, whether their rules must be published, and what remedies are available when plans adversely impact individual rights. These questions are examined through a factual analysis based on a set of ten hypothetical cases, which are discussed by national experts.This comparative approach identifies commonalities and differences between legal systems, such as in consultation and transparency, in the rights of public service users, and in legal remedies to address rules and plans. As in other volumes in the series, both similarity and difference are essential to understanding how a 'common core' is shaped and evolves.

Administrative rulemaking and planning is an under-studied and under-theorized area of public law. To better understand how administrative functions and powers are discharged by public authorities and private bodies, this seventh volume in the Common Core of European Administrative Law series argues that we must consider all forms of administrative action, not just formal procedures and judicial review. As such, greater attention needs to be paid to administrative rulemaking and planning, which have a significant impact on economics and society.Through extensive comparative research, this book examines this increasingly important field of administrative law. It focuses mainly on Europe, analysing ten national systems including eight European Union member states, Norway, and the UK, but it also explores the legal systems of the United States and China, as well as that of a non-state entity - the European Union itself.The questions investigated across these systems include whether administrative agencies may fetter their discretion through policy and rules, whether their rules must be published, and what remedies are available when plans adversely impact individual rights. These questions are examined through a factual analysis based on a set of ten hypothetical cases, which are discussed by national experts.This comparative approach identifies commonalities and differences between legal systems, such as in consultation and transparency, in the rights of public service users, and in legal remedies to address rules and plans. As in other volumes in the series, both similarity and difference are essential to understanding how a 'common core' is shaped and evolves.

This book argues that the development of administrative law in Europe owes much to Austria, not only because its Administrative Court was one of the first to define and refine general principles, such as legality, due process and general interest, but also because in 1925 Austria adopted a general law of administrative procedure, which had important consequences for other legal systems. The book follows two themes. The first is the Austrian codification of administrative procedure itself. The second is the spread of Austrian ideas and institutions to some neighbouring countries. From the first point of view, the book points out the various factors that favoured the adoption of administrative procedure legislation and the reception of the model of review. In this respect, the book is enriched by the English translation of the Austrian general act of 1925. From the other viewpoint, the book deviates from the standard accounts whereby the Austrian codification had some influence on its closest neighbours, including Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia; first, because it compares their legislative provisions, as well as their durability, notwithstanding drastic political changes, when these countries fell under Soviet rule; second, because it does not limit itself to the concept of ''influence'', arguing that there was a ''diffusion'' of general administrative procedure legislation; thirdly, because it examines why the major administrative systems of continental Europe, such as France, Germany and Italy, did not adopt administrative procedure legislation. The book thus provides an unprecedented outlook on the emergence of an increasing common core regarding administrative procedure.

This book argues that the development of administrative law in Europe owes much to Austria, not only because its Administrative Court was one of the first to define and refine general principles, such as legality, due process and general interest, but also because in 1925 Austria adopted a general law of administrative procedure, which had important consequences for other legal systems. The book follows two themes. The first is the Austrian codification of administrative procedure itself. The second is the spread of Austrian ideas and institutions to some neighbouring countries. From the first point of view, the book points out the various factors that favoured the adoption of administrative procedure legislation and the reception of the model of review. In this respect, the book is enriched by the English translation of the Austrian general act of 1925. From the other viewpoint, the book deviates from the standard accounts whereby the Austrian codification had some influence on its closest neighbours, including Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia; first, because it compares their legislative provisions, as well as their durability, notwithstanding drastic political changes, when these countries fell under Soviet rule; second, because it does not limit itself to the concept of ''influence'', arguing that there was a ''diffusion'' of general administrative procedure legislation; thirdly, because it examines why the major administrative systems of continental Europe, such as France, Germany and Italy, did not adopt administrative procedure legislation. The book thus provides an unprecedented outlook on the emergence of an increasing common core regarding administrative procedure.

Administrative rulemaking and planning is an under-studied and under-theorized area of public law. To better understand how administrative functions and powers are discharged by public authorities and private bodies, this seventh volume in the Common Core of European Administrative Law series argues that we must consider all forms of administrative action, not just formal procedures and judicial review. As such, greater attention needs to be paid to administrative rulemaking and planning, which have a significant impact on economics and society.Through extensive comparative research, this book examines this increasingly important field of administrative law. It focuses mainly on Europe, analysing ten national systems including eight European Union member states, Norway, and the UK, but it also explores the legal systems of the United States and China, as well as that of a non-state entity - the European Union itself.The questions investigated across these systems include whether administrative agencies may fetter their discretion through policy and rules, whether their rules must be published, and what remedies are available when plans adversely impact individual rights. These questions are examined through a factual analysis based on a set of ten hypothetical cases, which are discussed by national experts.This comparative approach identifies commonalities and differences between legal systems, such as in consultation and transparency, in the rights of public service users, and in legal remedies to address rules and plans. As in other volumes in the series, both similarity and difference are essential to understanding how a 'common core' is shaped and evolves.

This book argues that the development of administrative law in Europe owes much to Austria, not only because its Administrative Court was one of the first to define and refine general principles, such as legality, due process and general interest, but also because in 1925 Austria adopted a general law of administrative procedure, which had important consequences for other legal systems. The book follows two themes. The first is the Austrian codification of administrative procedure itself. The second is the spread of Austrian ideas and institutions to some neighbouring countries. From the first point of view, the book points out the various factors that favoured the adoption of administrative procedure legislation and the reception of the model of review. In this respect, the book is enriched by the English translation of the Austrian general act of 1925. From the other viewpoint, the book deviates from the standard accounts whereby the Austrian codification had some influence on its closest neighbours, including Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia; first, because it compares their legislative provisions, as well as their durability, notwithstanding drastic political changes, when these countries fell under Soviet rule; second, because it does not limit itself to the concept of 'influence', arguing that there was a 'diffusion' of general administrative procedure legislation; thirdly, because it examines why the major administrative systems of continental Europe, such as France, Germany and Italy, did not adopt administrative procedure legislation. The book thus provides an unprecedented outlook on the emergence of an increasing common core regarding administrative procedure.

Administrative rulemaking and planning is an under-studied and under-theorized area of public law. To better understand how administrative functions and powers are discharged by public authorities and private bodies, this seventh volume in the Common Core of European Administrative Law series argues that we must consider all forms of administrative action, not just formal procedures and judicial review. As such, greater attention needs to be paid to administrative rulemaking and planning, which have a significant impact on economics and society.Through extensive comparative research, this book examines this increasingly important field of administrative law. It focuses mainly on Europe, analysing ten national systems including eight European Union member states, Norway, and the UK, but it also explores the legal systems of the United States and China, as well as that of a non-state entity - the European Union itself.The questions investigated across these systems include whether administrative agencies may fetter their discretion through policy and rules, whether their rules must be published, and what remedies are available when plans adversely impact individual rights. These questions are examined through a factual analysis based on a set of ten hypothetical cases, which are discussed by national experts.This comparative approach identifies commonalities and differences between legal systems, such as in consultation and transparency, in the rights of public service users, and in legal remedies to address rules and plans. As in other volumes in the series, both similarity and difference are essential to understanding how a 'common core' is shaped and evolves.

Administrative rulemaking and planning is an under-studied and under-theorized area of public law. To better understand how administrative functions and powers are discharged by public authorities and private bodies, this seventh volume in the Common Core of European Administrative Law series argues that we must consider all forms of administrative action, not just formal procedures and judicial review. As such, greater attention needs to be paid to administrative rulemaking and planning, which have a significant impact on economics and society.Through extensive comparative research, this book examines this increasingly important field of administrative law. It focuses mainly on Europe, analysing ten national systems including eight European Union member states, Norway, and the UK, but it also explores the legal systems of the United States and China, as well as that of a non-state entity - the European Union itself.The questions investigated across these systems include whether administrative agencies may fetter their discretion through policy and rules, whether their rules must be published, and what remedies are available when plans adversely impact individual rights. These questions are examined through a factual analysis based on a set of ten hypothetical cases, which are discussed by national experts.This comparative approach identifies commonalities and differences between legal systems, such as in consultation and transparency, in the rights of public service users, and in legal remedies to address rules and plans. As in other volumes in the series, both similarity and difference are essential to understanding how a 'common core' is shaped and evolves.

This book argues that the development of administrative law in Europe owes much to Austria, not only because its Administrative Court was one of the first to define and refine general principles, such as legality, due process and general interest, but also because in 1925 Austria adopted a general law of administrative procedure, which had important consequences for other legal systems. The book follows two themes. The first is the Austrian codification of administrative procedure itself. The second is the spread of Austrian ideas and institutions to some neighbouring countries. From the first point of view, the book points out the various factors that favoured the adoption of administrative procedure legislation and the reception of the model of review. In this respect, the book is enriched by the English translation of the Austrian general act of 1925. From the other viewpoint, the book deviates from the standard accounts whereby the Austrian codification had some influence on its closest neighbours, including Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia; first, because it compares their legislative provisions, as well as their durability, notwithstanding drastic political changes, when these countries fell under Soviet rule; second, because it does not limit itself to the concept of ''influence'', arguing that there was a ''diffusion'' of general administrative procedure legislation; thirdly, because it examines why the major administrative systems of continental Europe, such as France, Germany and Italy, did not adopt administrative procedure legislation. The book thus provides an unprecedented outlook on the emergence of an increasing common core regarding administrative procedure.

This book argues that the development of administrative law in Europe owes much to Austria, not only because its Administrative Court was one of the first to define and refine general principles, such as legality, due process and general interest, but also because in 1925 Austria adopted a general law of administrative procedure, which had important consequences for other legal systems. The book follows two themes. The first is the Austrian codification of administrative procedure itself. The second is the spread of Austrian ideas and institutions to some neighbouring countries. From the first point of view, the book points out the various factors that favoured the adoption of administrative procedure legislation and the reception of the model of review. In this respect, the book is enriched by the English translation of the Austrian general act of 1925. From the other viewpoint, the book deviates from the standard accounts whereby the Austrian codification had some influence on its closest neighbours, including Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia; first, because it compares their legislative provisions, as well as their durability, notwithstanding drastic political changes, when these countries fell under Soviet rule; second, because it does not limit itself to the concept of ''influence'', arguing that there was a ''diffusion'' of general administrative procedure legislation; thirdly, because it examines why the major administrative systems of continental Europe, such as France, Germany and Italy, did not adopt administrative procedure legislation. The book thus provides an unprecedented outlook on the emergence of an increasing common core regarding administrative procedure.

Administrative rulemaking and planning is an under-studied and under-theorized area of public law. To better understand how administrative functions and powers are discharged by public authorities and private bodies, this seventh volume in the Common Core of European Administrative Law series argues that we must consider all forms of administrative action, not just formal procedures and judicial review. As such, greater attention needs to be paid to administrative rulemaking and planning, which have a significant impact on economics and society.Through extensive comparative research, this book examines this increasingly important field of administrative law. It focuses mainly on Europe, analysing ten national systems including eight European Union member states, Norway, and the UK, but it also explores the legal systems of the United States and China, as well as that of a non-state entity - the European Union itself.The questions investigated across these systems include whether administrative agencies may fetter their discretion through policy and rules, whether their rules must be published, and what remedies are available when plans adversely impact individual rights. These questions are examined through a factual analysis based on a set of ten hypothetical cases, which are discussed by national experts.This comparative approach identifies commonalities and differences between legal systems, such as in consultation and transparency, in the rights of public service users, and in legal remedies to address rules and plans. As in other volumes in the series, both similarity and difference are essential to understanding how a 'common core' is shaped and evolves.

This book argues that the development of administrative law in Europe owes much to Austria, not only because its Administrative Court was one of the first to define and refine general principles, such as legality, due process and general interest, but also because in 1925 Austria adopted a general law of administrative procedure, which had important consequences for other legal systems. The book follows two themes. The first is the Austrian codification of administrative procedure itself. The second is the spread of Austrian ideas and institutions to some neighbouring countries. From the first point of view, the book points out the various factors that favoured the adoption of administrative procedure legislation and the reception of the model of review. In this respect, the book is enriched by the English translation of the Austrian general act of 1925. From the other viewpoint, the book deviates from the standard accounts whereby the Austrian codification had some influence on its closest neighbours, including Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia; first, because it compares their legislative provisions, as well as their durability, notwithstanding drastic political changes, when these countries fell under Soviet rule; second, because it does not limit itself to the concept of 'influence', arguing that there was a 'diffusion' of general administrative procedure legislation; thirdly, because it examines why the major administrative systems of continental Europe, such as France, Germany and Italy, did not adopt administrative procedure legislation. The book thus provides an unprecedented outlook on the emergence of an increasing common core regarding administrative procedure.