Notes on the intensity of judicial review of regulatory acts

Abstract

The article examines the intensity of judicial review exercised by administrative courts over regulatory acts issued by independent authorities. Firstly, it addresses whether such judicial review should be conducted differently from the review of administrative acts in general. The Author argues that it should not. Secondly, the article considers whether the distinction—currently under debate—between judicial review of administrative discretion and judicial review of the administration’s technical assessments should be maintained. The Author contends that it should. Lastly, the article explores whether judicial review should be limited to assessing the reliability of the administration’s technical evaluation or whether the court should identify the "most reliable" solution and base the outcome of the dispute on that determination. In this regard, the Author advocates for an approach based on the refutation of the technical assessment: an assessment is deemed reliable only if it remains unrefuted at the conclusion of the judicial proceedings.