En jämförelse av negativ rättskraft inom migrationsrätten och förvaltningsrätten i övrigt
(2015) JURM02 20151Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Syftet med detta arbete är att undersöka den negativa rättskraften inom migrationsrätten jämfört med i förvaltningsrätten i övrigt frånsett beslut i ärenden enligt miljöbalken, i ärenden om offentlig upphandling och i vissa kommunalrättsliga ärenden som kan överklagas enligt reglerna om laglighetsprövning i kommunallagen samt i ärenden enligt lagen om offentlig upphandling. Jämförelsen avser negativa rättskraftens bakomliggande idéer, förekomst, sakliga omfattning och skydd.
Negativ rättskraft hos beslut av myndigheter och domstolar innebär att de bara undantagsvis får rubbas genom att återkallas, ändras eller att deras verkningar åsidosätts genom annat beslutsfattande.
Inom förvaltningsrätten saknar begreppet negativ rättskraft en... (More) - Syftet med detta arbete är att undersöka den negativa rättskraften inom migrationsrätten jämfört med i förvaltningsrätten i övrigt frånsett beslut i ärenden enligt miljöbalken, i ärenden om offentlig upphandling och i vissa kommunalrättsliga ärenden som kan överklagas enligt reglerna om laglighetsprövning i kommunallagen samt i ärenden enligt lagen om offentlig upphandling. Jämförelsen avser negativa rättskraftens bakomliggande idéer, förekomst, sakliga omfattning och skydd.
Negativ rättskraft hos beslut av myndigheter och domstolar innebär att de bara undantagsvis får rubbas genom att återkallas, ändras eller att deras verkningar åsidosätts genom annat beslutsfattande.
Inom förvaltningsrätten saknar begreppet negativ rättskraft en precis allmänt erkänd innebörd enligt doktrin och praxis. Med hjälp av begreppet korrektion av beslut definierades därför negativ rättskraft mer tydligt utan att strida mot hur begreppet i huvudsak allmänt uppfattas i doktrin och praxis.
Närmare bestämt innebär negativ rättskraft hos ett beslut i ett ärende, att avgörandet av frågan i ärendet genom beslutet bara i begränsad utsträckning får rubbas genom ett nytt beslut av myndigheten eller domstolen som fattade det eller av annan myndighet eller domstol. Dessutom innebär denna att anhängiggörande av ärende där fråga är om otillåtet rubbande inte får tas upp till prövning utan ska avvisas eller avslås. Systematisering av detta görs med distinktionen rättskraftens sakliga omfattning innefattande avgörandet av frågan i beslutet och omfattningens skydd mot beslutsfattande om otillåtet rubbande av det.
Resultatet av den åsyftade jämförelsen i detta arbete blev huvudsakligen
följande:
Bakomliggande idéer: Gynnande migrationsrättsliga besluts adressat ska, i likhet med inom förvaltningsrätten i övrigt, skyddas mot att myndigheter och domstolar inte rättssäkert rubbar det gynnande beslutet till nackdel för adressaten.
Förekomst och skydd: För beslutsadressaten gynnande beslut vinner negativ rättskraft enligt migrationsrätten i likhet med inom förvaltningsrätten i övrigt. De för adressaten betungande besluten avslag och återkallande av uppehållstillstånd samt om avvisning och utvisning vinner stark negativ rättskraft, vilket är ett undantag från vad som i princip gäller inom förvaltningsrätten i övrigt. Liksom i förvaltningsrätten i övrigt skyddas rättskraftens sakliga omfattning mot otillåtet rubbande genom förbud mot att uppta detta till prövning och att anhängiggörande av sådan prövning ska avvisas.
Sakliga omfattning: I princip densamma inom migrationsrätten som inom förvaltningsrätten i övrigt frånsett att i asylprocessen ska alla, där åberopade nya omständigheter som är omedelbart relevanta för bifall, prövas. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- The purpose of this work is to investigate the negative legal force of decisions under immigration law compared to under administrative law in general, with the exception of environmental protection law, public purchasing law and certain local government laws. The comparison refers to the underlying ideas, presence, factual extent and protection of the factual extent.
Negative legal force of the decisions by the authorities and the courts means that they are only, by exception, allowed to be altered by revoking, changing or that their effects are overridden by another decision.
In administrative law, the concept of negative legal force of a decision lacks a precise and generally recognized meaning according to doctrine and practice.... (More) - The purpose of this work is to investigate the negative legal force of decisions under immigration law compared to under administrative law in general, with the exception of environmental protection law, public purchasing law and certain local government laws. The comparison refers to the underlying ideas, presence, factual extent and protection of the factual extent.
Negative legal force of the decisions by the authorities and the courts means that they are only, by exception, allowed to be altered by revoking, changing or that their effects are overridden by another decision.
In administrative law, the concept of negative legal force of a decision lacks a precise and generally recognized meaning according to doctrine and practice. Therefore, with the help of the concept of correction of decisions, negative legal force is defined more clearly without conflicting with how the concept is generally understood in doctrine and practice.
Specifically, negative legal force of a decision in a case means that the ruling of a matter through a decision can only be altered or overridden to a limited extent by a new decision of the authority or the court which decided it, or by another authority or court. In addition, bringing the matter of such an unlawful modification of a decision to an authority or court should be dismissed or denied. Systematization of the negative legal force of a decision is done through the concepts of the factual extent of the negative legal force of a decision, containing the ruling of a matter by the decision, and the protection of the factual extent against unlawful modification by other decisions of an authority or court.
The main results of this work are as follows:
The underlying idea: The addressee of favorable decisions under immigration law must be protected against authorities and courts arbitrarily altering the favorable decisions and overriding their effects by another decision as well as within administrative law in general.
Occurrence and protection: For the addressee, a favorable decision makes negative legal force go into effect under immigration law as under administrative law in general. For the addressee, onerous decisions in refusing and withdrawing residence permits as well as deportation and expulsion makes strong negative legal force go into effect under immigration law, which is an exception to how the negative legal force of onerous decisions is regulated under administrative law in general. Under immigration law as well as administrative law in general, the protection of the factual extent of the negative legal force of a decision against an unlawful modification means that bringing the matter of such a modification to an authority or court should be dismissed.
Factual extent: This is essentially the same under the immigration law as under administrative law in general, except that in the asylum process all new facts directly relevant to granting asylum should be tested by the court. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/5435467
- author
- Nilsson, Vanessa LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- A comparison of the negative legal force of decisions under immigration law compared to under administrative law in general
- course
- JURM02 20151
- year
- 2015
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- rättskraft, negativ rättskraft, förvaltningsrätt, migrationsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 5435467
- date added to LUP
- 2015-10-08 14:16:50
- date last changed
- 2015-10-08 14:16:50
@misc{5435467,
abstract = {{The purpose of this work is to investigate the negative legal force of decisions under immigration law compared to under administrative law in general, with the exception of environmental protection law, public purchasing law and certain local government laws. The comparison refers to the underlying ideas, presence, factual extent and protection of the factual extent.
Negative legal force of the decisions by the authorities and the courts means that they are only, by exception, allowed to be altered by revoking, changing or that their effects are overridden by another decision.
In administrative law, the concept of negative legal force of a decision lacks a precise and generally recognized meaning according to doctrine and practice. Therefore, with the help of the concept of correction of decisions, negative legal force is defined more clearly without conflicting with how the concept is generally understood in doctrine and practice.
Specifically, negative legal force of a decision in a case means that the ruling of a matter through a decision can only be altered or overridden to a limited extent by a new decision of the authority or the court which decided it, or by another authority or court. In addition, bringing the matter of such an unlawful modification of a decision to an authority or court should be dismissed or denied. Systematization of the negative legal force of a decision is done through the concepts of the factual extent of the negative legal force of a decision, containing the ruling of a matter by the decision, and the protection of the factual extent against unlawful modification by other decisions of an authority or court.
The main results of this work are as follows:
The underlying idea: The addressee of favorable decisions under immigration law must be protected against authorities and courts arbitrarily altering the favorable decisions and overriding their effects by another decision as well as within administrative law in general.
Occurrence and protection: For the addressee, a favorable decision makes negative legal force go into effect under immigration law as under administrative law in general. For the addressee, onerous decisions in refusing and withdrawing residence permits as well as deportation and expulsion makes strong negative legal force go into effect under immigration law, which is an exception to how the negative legal force of onerous decisions is regulated under administrative law in general. Under immigration law as well as administrative law in general, the protection of the factual extent of the negative legal force of a decision against an unlawful modification means that bringing the matter of such a modification to an authority or court should be dismissed.
Factual extent: This is essentially the same under the immigration law as under administrative law in general, except that in the asylum process all new facts directly relevant to granting asylum should be tested by the court.}},
author = {{Nilsson, Vanessa}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{En jämförelse av negativ rättskraft inom migrationsrätten och förvaltningsrätten i övrigt}},
year = {{2015}},
}