THE AUTHORITY OF THE JUDICIARY IN RESCINDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACT FOR MANAGEMENT ERROR A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN IRAQ, LEBANON AND FRENCH LAW
- Author:
- SAIFALDAIN HAYDER ALI ALZOBAIE
- Level:
- Master
- Field of study:
- Law
- Language:
- Arabic
- Faculty:
- Faculty of Law
- Year:
- 2021
- Publisher:
- URD Press
- Supervisor(s):
- SEYED MOHAMMED MAHDI GHAMAMI
In conducting its various legal activities, the administration in Iraq, Lebanon and France resorts to two methods: the first: it takes the form of the administrative decision, and the other is the administrative contract. Perhaps the starting point is to study the issue of judicial termination of the administrative contract due to the management’s mistake, starting from the administrative contract, which many jurisprudential disputes arose. Some jurists, led by Deiji, attacked the idea of an administrative contract distinct from the law contracts for its legal system and its effects, stressing that the administrative contract and private law contracts are subject to the same essential foundations and elements, but it soon became clear that what Deji went to was incorrect in the face of the strength of arguments claimed by the jurist. , which focuses on the fact that the administrative contract is an integrated contract in terms of its basic pillars, although it gives the administration exceptional powers that are not familiar in private law contracts. In addition, it aims to achieve the purposes of the public utility and meet the requirements of the public interest in Iraq, Lebanon and France.
Therefore, resorting to the contract judge represents the last stage when the previous procedures did not achieve the purpose intended by the contracting party.
The matter remains within the jurisdiction of the contract judge if he wishes to terminate the contract with compensation to the contracting party for the damages he sustained as a result of the serious error of the contracting administration, and he may reject the contracting party’s claim for rescission limited to a judgment of fair compensation to the contracting party with the continuity of the contractor’s implementation of his contractual obligations. He is not entitled to benefit from the non-implementation payment system known under private law.