Administrative Silence and Mootness of Appeal Period
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAA party challenged a decision that upheld the dismissal of their administrative appeal regarding the rejection of a request for an order compelling the administrative authority to act, arguing that the authority had failed to respond to their initial administrative appeal within the legal timeframe, thereby tacitly rejecting it; however, the court dismissed the appeal, reasoning that the lower court had correctly determined that the administrative silence, despite the initial delay, did not constitute an implicit rejection because the appellant had subsequently filed the required appeal to the higher administrative jurisdiction within the appropriate legal window, thereby rendering the initial administrative inaction moot regarding the commencement of the statute of limitations for judicial review.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAArt. 108 al. 1 let. a LTF, Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Administrative Silence and Mootness of Appeal Period: A party challenged a decision that upheld the dismissal of their administrative appeal regarding the rejection of a request for an order compelling the administrative authority to act, arguing that the authority had failed to respond to their initial administrative appeal within the legal timeframe, thereby tacitly rejecting it; however, the court dismissed the appeal, reasoning that the lower court had correctly determined that the administrative silence, despite the initial delay, did not constitute an implicit rejection because the appellant had subsequently filed the required appeal to the higher administrative jurisdiction within the appropriate legal window, thereby rendering the initial administrative inaction moot regarding the commencement of the statute of limitations for judicial review.
Mots-clés
Généré par l'IADispositions légales citées
Généré par l'IADécisions connexes
Généré par l'IAQuestions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator
Généré par l'IAThe appeal was rejected as inadmissible because it was directed against a final decision that did not require further review under the simplified procedure.
The appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the federal court proceedings.
Texte complet
C/12605/2018
### [ACJC/706/2018](/apps/decis/fr/acjc/show/1633709) du 06.06.2018 ( IUS ) , REJETE
[](/apps/decis/fr/acjc/file/2018/0007/ACJC_000706_2018_C_12605_2018.pdf)
* /