Pushing the Appeal Against Fraud Before the Administrative Judiciary: A Comparative Study

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the jurisdiction to hear counterfeiting appeals if raised before administrative courts in Jordan, By comparing the position of the administrative judiciary in Jordan with that of the French and Egyptian administrative judiciary, Indicate whether the jurisdiction of the court in question is discretionary or restricted. The statement of the legal nature of this appeal and the position of jurisprudence and administrative judiciary on this nature.The results of the study showed that both the French and Egyptian administrative courts have admitted to themselves the power to consider the case of filing an appeal against forgery before the administrative courts, considering that the challenge of forgery is a sub-payment of the original judge. This was confirmed by the French State Council and the Egyptian State Council through the rulings of their administrative courts. One of the most important recommendations of the study was that the Jordanian administrative judiciary, especially after the issuance of the current administrative judiciary law, which came in response to the constitutional amendments scheduled in 2011, following the conduct of the French and Egyptian administrative judges, considering the impeachment of fraud by the original judge as a subsidiary payment to the original judge.

Keywords: Forgery, administrative jurisdiction, legal nature.

DOI: 10.7176/JLPG/93-10

Publication date: January 31^st 2020