Lack of Arrangement with another Administration Authority Required in Art. 106 § 1 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings as a Cause of an Administrative Procedure Resumption

Abstract

Resumption of administrative proceedings aims to create a party legal possibilities for a new investigation procedure to be carried out and a new decision in a case already completed by the final decision to be reissued. Reconducting of administrative proceedings is then justified. Although administrative proceedings is homogeneous, in case of special procedures participation of other administration authorities is often required. The basic legal regulation in this area is included in the provision of art. 106 § 1 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings. Public administration authorities have a legal obligation to cooperate, which follows both from the principle of a legal state, as well as the principle of the separation of powers (art. 2 and 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland). The legal consequences of the breach of the cooperation obligation are laid down in art. 145 § 1 point 6 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings, which creates a process guarantee for the cooperation of authorities pursuant to art. 106 to take place. Therefore art. 145 § 1 point 6 refers only to such situations in which a request to take a position has not been made. Other violations of art. 106 are not covered by this provision. Therefore this reason relates to the circumstances connected with the proceedings conducted before issuing a decision on the administrative body activities. Taking a position (through arrangement or consultation) is a typical issue of a formal nature. Therefore, lack of another authority’s position ought to be treated as a violation of the procedure rules. To refer to this basis it is not necessary to present a causal link between the lack of a position and the content of the decision, since restarting the proceedings on the basis of art. 145 § 1 point 6 occurs regardless the fact whether the lack of cooperation had an impact on the decision’s content.