GREECE Law and Practice Contributed by: Anastasios Virvilios, Evangelia Sgountzou and Eirini Tsalapati, Machas & Partners
constitute grounds for the annulment of the act adopted. It is up to the court to assess whether or not the procedural rule is essential. 10.4 Factual Errors The infringement of a provision of law in sub - stance is another ground for annulment. Accord - ing to legal doctrine, infringement of a provision of law in substance includes an incorrect sub - stantive assessment of the existence or non- existence of facts as a ground for annulment in administrative substantive disputes. However, as case law has consistently held, the substantive assessment by the administration of the facts constituting the legal requirements for the adoption of the administrative act is not subject to review for annulment. 10.5 Abdication or Fettering of Discretion The administration will exercise its authority on a binding or discretionary basis. Binding authority is when the law fully binds the administration as to whether, how and when to act. Discretion - ary authority, by contrast, is exercised when the rule of law governing the administration’s action gives it the discretion to decide when and what to do, and sometimes even whether to do it. Violation of a substantive provision of law is a ground for annulment. Infringement of a provi - sion of law occurs when: • the administration does not comply with an express requirement or prohibition of a rule of law which establishes a binding power or discretion; or • in a rule which provides for a discretionary power, the administration infringes the les -
sons of common experience and reason, the principle of equality, the principle of good administration and, in particular, the principle of proportionality. Furthermore, judicial review of the administra - tion’s decisions concerning the use of discre - tionary powers lies in checking that the extreme legal limits of discretion have not been exceed - ed. In any case, in line with the principle of legal - ity, the administration must issue decisions in a competent manner, as expressly provided for by the relevant legislation. Any decision or act adopted without authority will constitute grounds for its annulment. 10.6 Bias The principle of impartiality of administrative bodies is enshrined in Article 7 of the CAP. Accordingly, administrative bodies, whether uni - lateral or collective, must provide guarantees of impartial judgment in the exercise of their pow - ers. Administrative bodies, and members of the col - lective bodies of the administration, in particular, do not provide guarantees of impartial judgment only where they have a personal interest in the outcome of a particular case or a special con - nection or a special relationship or enmity with the persons concerned. They also do so where there is a reasonable suspicion of bias, such as where the members have an already formed and irreversible, ie, prejudiced, opinion about the case or the person they are about to judge. Where an administrative act has been adopted in breach of the principle of impartiality, that act may be challenged on that ground. This falls within the broader category of grounds for
160 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook