On 10 January 2025, Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes entered into force, repealing Law No. 03/L-202 on Administrative Disputes, which had entered into force in 2010.
This legislative change introduces significant improvements in the field of administrative justice, aiming to increase efficiency and transparency in public administration and administrative courts.
While the previous Law on Administrative Disputes regulated the jurisdiction and composition of the courts and procedural rules, focusing on the legality of administrative acts and the rights of parties, its primary objective was to ensure judicial protection of the rights and interests of parties affected by administrative decisions, actions or omissions.
Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes has a broader objective, encompassing the protection of subjective rights and legitimate interests, as well as ensuring legality in the exercise of public authority.
Accordingly, the new Law on Administrative Disputes places greater emphasis on judicial review of the legality of public authority, which is expected to have a positive impact on ensuring a more accountable public administration.
PRINCIPLES OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
In addition to the fundamental principles governing administrative disputes under the previous law, such as the principle of legality, the principle of efficiency and the principle of assistance to uninformed parties, Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes introduces, for the first time in this field of law, the principles of mediation and reconciliation, promoting alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.
CATEGORIZATION OF CLAIMS
Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes also introduces innovations concerning the categories of claims that may be filed.
The previous law primarily focused on claims seeking the annulment of administrative acts, the issuance of such acts in cases of administrative silence, and compensation for damages caused to parties as a result of the enforcement of contested administrative acts.
Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes introduces additional categories of claims, including:
- Claims for the cessation or performance of other administrative actions: The claimant may request that the administration cease an unlawful action or perform a required action.
- Declaratory claims: These allow for the determination of the existence or non-existence of a legal relationship or a declaration of the unlawfulness of an act that no longer produces legal effects.
- Claims for compensation for damages: These may be brought to seek compensation for damages caused by unlawful administrative actions or omissions.
- Claims against normative sublegal acts: These allow for the repeal of normative acts considered unlawful or contrary to the legitimate interests of the parties.
- Claims concerning jurisdiction: These address disputes regarding the jurisdiction of an administrative body.
- Claims concerning administrative contracts: These address the validity, interpretation or performance of contracts between public authorities and private entities.
It is also important to emphasize that, unlike the repealed law, the new law expressly provides that a claim seeking the issuance of an administrative act in cases of administrative silence may be filed only where the principle of tacit approval does not apply, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Law on General Administrative Procedure.
FLEXIBILITY OF LEGAL DEADLINES
Under the previous Law on Administrative Disputes, strict deadlines applied to the submission of legal remedies, including administrative appeals before second-instance administrative bodies and judicial claims.
For example, the deadline for filing a claim was thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the administrative act.
Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes introduces greater flexibility in handling cases by providing extended deadlines in specific circumstances, including the doubling of deadlines where the contested administrative act does not contain clear and accurate information regarding available legal remedies, as well as in other situations provided for under the law.
CHANGES TO HEARING PROCEDURES AND DECISION-MAKING
The previous Law on Administrative Disputes placed particular emphasis on oral hearings as the primary method for examining administrative cases, establishing an obligation to hear the parties before issuing a final decision.
Under the new law, judicial proceedings are structured in greater detail, emphasizing the right to due process and transparency in decision-making.
Additional provisions have also been introduced regulating the examination of cases without holding a court hearing in specific circumstances.
EFFECTS AND ENFORCEMENT OF COURT DECISIONS
Although the previous law provided that court decisions were binding on the relevant administrative authorities, it did not establish sanctions for administrative bodies that failed to comply with specific deadlines for enforcing court decisions.
The new law establishes deadlines for the enforcement of court decisions and introduces sanctions against administrative authorities that fail to comply with court orders within the prescribed periods, as provided under Article 107 of Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes.
ORDINARY AND EXTRAORDINARY LEGAL REMEDIES
The new Law on Administrative Disputes has not changed the deadlines, grounds or procedure for filing an appeal as an ordinary legal remedy against decisions of first-instance courts.
However, the new law introduces provisions specifying that the second-instance court shall decide on an appeal following an oral hearing only where there are new facts, new evidence or new questions of law that may affect the resolution of the case.
Accordingly, additional provisions regulate the summoning of parties and the conduct of hearings before the second-instance court.
The innovations introduced by Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes also concern the types of extraordinary legal remedies available in administrative proceedings.
In particular, the new law provides that a request for the protection of legality is no longer permitted in administrative proceedings, although this remedy was available under the previous law.
INTERIM MEASURES FOR SECURING CLAIMS
One of the innovations introduced by Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes concerns interim measures for securing claims in administrative proceedings.
The law expressly determines the types of measures that a court may order depending on the nature of the claim for which interim protection is requested.
- Claims for the annulment of an administrative act or for the cessation of another administrative action: Upon request, the court may suspend the implementation of the administrative act or order the immediate cessation of the relevant administrative action.
- Claims for the repeal of a normative sublegal administrative act: Upon request, the court may order the non-application of the normative act or suspend its legal effects.
- Claims seeking the issuance of an administrative act or the performance of another administrative action: Upon request, the court may order an interim measure temporarily regulating the disputed legal relationship.
- Other appropriate measures: Unless expressly provided otherwise in the relevant article, the court may, upon request, order any other appropriate and proportionate measure provided for under the applicable legislation governing civil judicial proceedings where the measures listed above do not provide sufficient protection to the applicant.
The law also establishes the conditions that must be satisfied for the court to grant any of these interim measures.
An application for interim measures may be submitted together with the claim or after the claim has been filed with the court.
COSTS OF PROCEEDINGS
Under the previous Law on Administrative Disputes, the costs of administrative judicial proceedings were regulated in such a manner that each party was responsible for bearing its own procedural costs.
Under the new Law on Administrative Disputes, the unsuccessful party is required to bear all court costs.
Exceptionally, this rule does not apply in the circumstances provided for under Article 65, paragraph 6, of the Law.
This provision concerns situations where the claimant’s request for the annulment of an administrative act is rejected despite identified procedural violations, provided that the defendant administrative authority demonstrates during the proceedings that such violations did not affect the operative part of the act, which would have remained the same in any event.
In such cases, the court costs shall be borne by the defendant administrative authority.
CONCLUSION
Overall, Law No. 08/L-182 on Administrative Disputes represents a significant advancement in regulating relations between public administration and citizens, providing a more appropriate and effective legal framework for resolving administrative matters.
The law contributes to ensuring transparency and the protection of rights by providing broader opportunities for addressing complaints and resolving administrative disputes, while strengthening the accountability of public institutions.
Author: Agnesa Azemi Ademi
