موقف المشرع الأردني من منح الأحكام النهائية الصادرة في دعوى الإلغاء القوة التنفيذية : دراسة تحليلية مقارنة

الملخص EN

The Jordanian legislator in the Administrative Judiciary Law, wanted to go along with the position of the Egyptian legislator under the State Council Law, that the appeal of the judgment of the Administrative Court did not entail a halt to their implementation unless the Supreme Administrative Court orders otherwise.

This is due to the wisdom of finding a balance between the litigation parties in the annulment lawsuit and putting an end to the intransigence of the administration and its cover-up by appealing the ruling on the illegality of the decision to continue its implementation, and the Supreme Administrative Court oversight loses its value, If the administration was able to achieve its illegal behavior.

during the period of consideration of the appeal, but his legislative treatment was contradictory and his influence by the Egyptian legislation was fragmentary.

He did not give the rulings issued by the Administrative Court the rules related to the res judicata to grant it executive force, it also did not take into account the reality of the Jordanian administrative judiciary and the legal composition of administrative court judges, which affected the wisdom sought in achieving judicial satisfaction for the parties to the dispute.

As a result, a major criticism emerged from the Jordanian administrative jurisprudence.

Where the study concluded by presenting a set of recommendations that would achieve harmony in the plan of the Jordanian legislator.