About: Legitimate expectation

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: Legitimate expectation Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : dbpedia.org associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.org/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FLegitimate_expectation

The doctrine of legitimate expectation was first developed in English law as a ground of judicial review in administrative law to protect a procedural or substantive interest when a public authority rescinds from a representation made to a person. It is based on the principles of natural justice and fairness, and seeks to prevent authorities from abusing power.

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	Thing
rdfs:label	Legitimate expectation (en) Vertrauensschutz (de) 신뢰보호의 원칙 (ko) 信賴保護原則 (zh)
rdfs:comment	신뢰보호의 원칙(독일어 : Vertrauensschutz, 한자 : 信賴保護의 原則)이란 행정청이 국민에 대하여 행한 언동의 정당성 또는 계속성에 대한 보호가치 있는 개인의 신뢰를 보호하는 법원칙을 말한다. 대한민국의 행정절차법(제4조), 국세기본법(제18조 제3항) 등에서 명문으로 인정되며 판례상으로도 인정되고 있다. 신뢰보호의 원칙은 대륙법계의 관념이나 영미법계의 보통법상 금반언의 법리와 같은 이념을 가지고 있다. 신뢰형성의 결정적 요인인 사실이 사후에 변경되고 관계자가 이를 인식하거나 인식 할 수 있었던 경우에는 관계자는 신뢰의 이익을 원용할 수 없다. (ko) 信賴保護原則（英語：Legitimate expectation，香港譯為合法期望），是起源自英國行政法的法律概念。法院在進行違憲審查時，乃在保護人民對於國家正當合理的信賴；人民因信賴特定行政行為所形成之法秩序，而政府安排其生活或處置其財產時，不能因為嗣後行政行為之變更而影響人民之既得權益、使其遭受不可預見之損害。中華民國《行政程序法》第八條規定：「行政行為，應以誠實信用之方法為之，並應保護人民正當合理之信賴。」行政法係以不溯及既往為原則、溯及既往為例外。法律適用之基本原則中有所謂「不溯及既往」，此是源於法治國家內涵之信賴保護原則思想。基於此原則，立法機關於制定法律時，以衡量公益與利益保護之結果，會明定行政法規得例外的溯及既往；行政機關於適用法規時，即應遵守該原則，不得任意擴張例外之解釋而使行政法規之效力溯及於該法規生效前業已終結之事實或法律關係，以維持法律生活之安定。 (zh) Beim Vertrauensschutz handelt es sich um einen Rechtsgrundsatz, welcher besagt, dass ein vom Bürger entgegengebrachtes Vertrauen von der Rechtsordnung zu schützen ist. In Deutschland wird er aus dem verfassungsrechtlichen Rechtsstaatsprinzip (Art. 20 des Grundgesetzes) abgeleitet; in der Schweiz und im Fürstentum Liechtenstein ist verfassungsrechtliche Grundlage das Willkürverbot. Im Sozialrecht ist der Vertrauensschutz in § 45 Absatz 2 SGB X normiert. (de) The doctrine of legitimate expectation was first developed in English law as a ground of judicial review in administrative law to protect a procedural or substantive interest when a public authority rescinds from a representation made to a person. It is based on the principles of natural justice and fairness, and seeks to prevent authorities from abusing power. (en)
rdfs:seeAlso	Legal certainty
foaf:depiction
dcterms:subject	Administrative law
Wikipage page ID	2967809 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1123957517 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	Prerogative writ Proportionality (law) English law Prima facie Bloomsbury Publishing Apparent authority Home Secretary Hubert Parker, Baron Parker of Waddington Human rights Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Judicial review Peter Gibson Dumping (pricing policy) Constitution of Australia Contract Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service Court of Appeal (Hong Kong) Court of Appeal of Singapore Question of law GCHQ Government of the United Kingdom Thomson Reuters Damages Ultra vires London Borough of Hillingdon Singapore Prison Service Stephen Sedley List of national legal systems Public law Administrative law Tort Court of Appeal of England and Wales Law Quarterly Review Law of agency Misfeasance in public office Abuse of power European Court of Human Rights European Patent Office Federal Court of Australia Oxford University Press Cause of action Director of Immigration Judicial functions of the House of Lords Legitimate expectation in Singapore law Private law Public Law (journal) Writ of prohibition High Court of Australia High Court of Justice High Court of Singapore Courts of Northern Ireland Courts of the United Kingdom Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corp Administrative law John Laws (judge) Kenneth Diplock, Baron Diplock Audi alteram partem Human Rights Act 1998 Tom Denning, Baron Denning Minister for Industry and Science Natural justice Oriental Hotel murder Carswell (publisher) Certiorari Separation of powers Mandamus Master of the Rolls Modern Law Review Stephen Silber European Convention on Human Rights Ian Fraser, Baron Fraser of Tullybelton Lord Justice of Appeal Obiter dictum Sweet & Maxwell R v North and East Devon Health Authority, ex parte Coughlan Minister of Finance (Australia) Wednesbury unreasonableness

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (61 GB total memory, 44 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software