This presumption is rebutted where judicial review is exercised by administrative acts; There are two ways of exercising judicial control over administrative acts; by acting by the various means of control, when the acts are necessary to be declared null and void and withdrawn from the legal sphere. It should be noted, exceptionally, that it cannot be exercised on the sole initiative of the judge, since it is permissible for that official to apply it if the person concerned has so requested; Another aspect to be highlighted in the exceptional review is that the unenforced act is still in force in the field of law, but is not applicable in the present case. Administrative acts subject to judicial review of legality are those which terminate an administrative procedure. Finally, in accordance with the principle of self-protection, the administration may also review its acts of its own motion and annul or annul them without having to turn most of the time to the judges and magistrates of the administrative court in question. In many cases, before going to court, individuals must first appeal to the public administration itself. This activity is called administrative complaints and, over time, it is increasingly questioned due to its inefficiency, with a few exceptions. This and subsequent issues are governed by the well-known Law 30/1992 on the Legal Order of Public Administrations and the Common Administrative Procedure. “The Final Act is the one that terminates an administrative act by pronouncing, directly or indirectly, on the substance of the matter,” he explained. On the other hand, exceptionally, there is judicial review when the judge does not apply administrative acts because they violate the Constitution or the law; Where the review is exceptional, the nullity of the administrative act shall not be declared but shall not be applied with effect between the parties in accordance with Article 148 of the Rules of Procedure and Administrative Disputes, which provides: `In proceedings brought before the court of the Administrative Council in question, the court may, of its own motion or at the request of a party, exclude the application of administrative acts with an interparty effect: if they violate the political constitution or the law. According to the company, the implementing act, although also unilateral, does not create, modify or erase a legal situation, since the legal effect is produced by the administrative act which is the subject of the execution and is therefore not subject to review before the court.
Article 106 of the Spanish Constitution of 1978 confers on the courts the power to regulate, the legality of administrative activity and its subjection for the purposes that justify it. This function is exercised with the reference to Law 29/1998 regulating the administrative competence in question, which I will examine throughout the development of this issue. Although administrative acts enjoy a presumption of legality which means that they comply with the rules and the Constitution, this presumption may be rebutted by the administrative court in question if such acts are pursued by the means of control which concern them. If means of control such as nullity, nullity and restoration of the law, nullity as unconstitutional, nullity of elections, etc. are used, judges can exercise judicial review over the required administrative acts and use these means of control to determine whether or not they can be repealed. In the High Court`s view, only decisions of the administration resulting from the conclusion of administrative proceedings or procedural acts which make it impossible to pursue that appeal are subject to review of legality by the administrative court in question. – A continuous evaluation throughout the course through didactic actions that represent 50% of the final grade. It includes carrying out the different types of assessment, learning and monitoring activities. This was recalled by the Council of State when it found that the objection of lack of jurisdiction is not appropriate when the act is accused of being subject to such control because it is pronounced by a public body with administrative functions. That decision excludes from judicial review acts implementing an administrative or judicial decision, where it does not give a final ruling on an appeal, provided that it is adopted only for the purpose of the enforcement or enforcement of those decisions.