Nullity of Administrative Acts: Grounds, Legal Regime, Discretion

The issues of criteria for the nullity of administrative acts are considered, the ratio of an illegal and invalid act, as well as a null and void act, analyzed, the possibility of administrative discretion in determining an invalid administrative act is analyzed, the role of vague legal concepts when an administrative act is declared invalid is demonstrated. The Author uses a comparative legal method, including the analysis of the practice of Germany, Great Britain, South Africa, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Russia and other countries. Special attention is paid to the laws on administrative procedures adopted in the post-Soviet territory and the influence of the German doctrine on this process. It is concluded that for the continental legal order the most preferable way to formalize the criteria for the invalidity of an administrative act are laws on administrative procedures or their analogs, while in the common law states, legal doctrine and judicial practice are of great importance. At the same time, many countries avoid recognizing acts as null and void, preferring the construction of their voidability. This is related to ensuring the stability of public administration, the predictability of administrative activities, and the protection of legitimate expectations. In any case, the theory of the reality of the administrative act is prevailing, and nullity is rather viewed as an anomaly. Therefore, only acts that are adopted with the most significant violations, which do not allow talking about the fair consequences of their adoption, are considered invalid. The illegality of an act does not automatically entail its nullity. A similar trend can be traced in Russia, although individual norms of law and practice of courts indicate the possible formation of a doctrine of the invalidity of an administrative act in the Russian legal system. Insignificant acts do not give rise to consequences from the moment of their adoption, legally they do not exist, and nothing can generate anything. With this approach, the courts only fix the criterion of invalidity without a dispute about law. Insignificant acts should be distinguished from contested ones, the latter may turn out to be illegal, but for a number of reasons (for example, protection of trust) the fact of their existence is confirmed along with their consequences.

1. Frumarová K. Nullity and other Defects of Administrative Decisions in the Czech Republic. Baltic Journal of European Studies. 2015;5(2):70-89. https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2015-0014

2. Peine F.-J. Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht. Tübingen: C. F. Müller Publ.; 2008. 359 p.

3. Smyshlyaev A. L. “Good Manners” and “Harsh Laws” in the Roman Court. Ius Antiquum. Ancient Law. 2008;2:76-96. (In Russ.).

4. Grant J. A. Reason and Authority in Administrative Law. The Cambridge Law Journal. 2017;76(3):507-536. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197317000599

5. Starilov Yu. N. Administrative Procedures – Integral Part of the Legislation About State and Municipal Management: Problems of Theory, Practice and Lawmaking. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Law. 2019;4:8-27. (In Russ.).

6. Kofanov L. L. (Ed.). Digesta Iustiniani. Moscow: Statut Publ., 2005. Vol. VI (2), books XLI–XLIV. 568 p. (In Russ.).

7. Henrico R. The Functus Officio Doctrine and Invalid Administrative Action in South African Administrative Law: A Flexible Approach. Speculum Juris. 2020;34(2):115-129.

8. Wong A. S. P. Doctrine of Functus Officio: The Changing Face of Finality’s Old Guard. The Canadian Bar Review. 2020;98(3):543-582.

9. Kvosta P. Significance and Limits of Legal Force of Administrative Acts in Austria, or “Surprising Consequences of Legal Force”. In: Yearbook of Public Law 2018: Principles of Administrative Procedures and Administrative Proceedings. Moscow: Infotropik Media Publ.; 2018. P. 127–140. (In Russ.).

10. Davydov K. V. Administrative Procedures: Russian and Foreign Experience. Novosibirsk: Akademizdat Publ.; 2020. 516 p. (In Russ.).

11. Schmidt-Aßmann E. Das allgemeine Verwaltungsrecht als Ordnungsidee: Grundlagen und Aufgaben der verwaltungsrechtlichen Systembildung. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2006. 500 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-33899-3

12. Herrmann D. Aus dem Leben eines Verwaltungsakts. Zeitschrift für das Juristische Studium. 2011;1:25-29.

13. Broker L. Cancellation of Administrative Acts in Accordance with German Legislation. In: Yearbook of Public Law 2016: Administrative Act. Moscow: Infotropik Media Publ.; 2016. P. 196–205. (In Russ.).

14. Pretorius D. M. Oudekraal after Fifteen Years: The Second Act (or, A Reassessment of the Status and Force of Defective Administrative Decisions Pending Judicial Review). Stellenbosch Law Review. 2020;31(1):3-36.

15. Adams T. The Standard Theory of Administrative Unlawfulness. The Cambridge Law Journal. 2017;76(2):289-310. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197317000332

16. Forsyth C. The Legal Effect of Unlawful Administrative Acts: The Theory of the Second Actor Explained and Developed. Amicus Curiae. 2001;35:20–23.

17. Hoeren T. Prüfungsbescheide der Datenschutzaufsicht und ihre verwaltungsrechtliche Bindungswirkung. Recht der Datenverarbeitung. 2011;1:1-58.

18. Novoselov V. I. Legality of Acts of Governing Bodies. Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura Publ.; 1968. 108 p. (In Russ.).

19. Makartsev A. A. The Organizational Legal Regime of Election Commissions in the Russian Federation: Problems of Legal Status. Tomsk State University Journal of Law. 2014;3:51-60. (In Russ.).

20. Solovey Yu. P. Discretionary Nature of Administrative Act as a Circumstance Precluding Judicial Review of its Legality. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki = Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2019;4:72–99. https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2019.4.72.99 (In Russ.).

21. Broker L. Valuation Concept in Administrative Law. In: Yearbook of Public Law 2017: Discretion and Value Concepts in Administrative Law. Moscow: Infotropik Media Publ.; 2017. P. 260–271. (In Russ.).

22. Kareklas S. “Interference in the Mechanism of Functions” of the Administration: Defective / Illegal Administrative Act, Its Control. In: Yearbook of Public Law 2016: Administrative Act. Moscow: Infotropik Media Publ.; 2016. P. 206–221. (In Russ.).