Complainant lacks standing against dismissal of disciplinary case

ATA/514/1997Court of Justice / Administrative ChamberAug 26, 1997Inadmissible

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The court held that a disciplinary procedure is instituted to protect the state and not private interests. A person who merely denounces the alleged misconduct and thereby triggers the procedure has no personal interest protected by law and therefore lacks standing to appeal the order dismissing the case. The appeal was declared inadmissible.

Omnilex headnote

Art. 7 al. 1 LPA; quality to appeal in disciplinary proceedings: the denunciator lacks a personal legal interest against the dismissal of proceedings he or she initiated. Disciplinary proceedings are designed to protect public interests of the state, not subjective private interests. Mere originator status does not make the complainant a party to the proceedings nor confer standing to seek judicial review of the closing decision.

Full text

Descripteurs

PROCEDURE ADMINISTRATIVE; INTERET PERSONNEL; QUALITE DE PARTIE; PARTIE A LA PROCEDURE; BARR

Normes

LPA.7 al.1

Résumé

Le but de la procédure disciplinaire réside dans la protection de l'Etat et non d'intérêts particuliers; le dénonciateur n'a pas d'intérêt personnel à recourir contre le classement de la procédure à laquelle il a donné naissance.

Keywords

standingpersonal interestadmissibilitydisciplinary procedureparty statuspublic interest

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether the complainant has a personal interest allowing him to appeal the dismissal of disciplinary proceedings he initiated.

Extracted holding

No. Disciplinary proceedings serve the protection of the state, not private interests, so the complainant has no personal legal interest under Art. 7 para. 1 LPA to challenge the dismissal.

Extracted reasoning

Because the proceeding is directed at safeguarding public authority interests, the person who initiated it does not become a party with an individualized interest in its outcome; mere initiation of the process does not confer standing.

Complainant lacks standing against dismissal of disciplinary caseAI generated