إعادة التوازن المالي للعقد الإداري إزاء تدخلات أجنبية: دراسة تحليلية مقارنة

Abstract EN

Such as any lawsuit, an administrative lawsuit has two parties, however, what distinguishes the administrative proceedings is that the administration is a party with all its powers and privileges, due to it is responsible for the public interest and to ensure the functioning of public utilities regularly and steadily.

in contrast, the individual, the second party in the suit is weak in facing the administration, which often result in an imbalance legal relationship and clear differences in the legal positions of the parties to the lawsuit.

this paper addresses the theory emergency situations and unexpected materialistic difficulty theory on the financial rebalance of the administrative contracts between administrative suit under the Jordan law and comparison judiciary.

this theory aims to achieve the financial balance and compensate the contracting party of the burdens resulting as a result of foreign interventions.

the study concluded set of findings and recommendations perhaps the most important among them the failure of the Jordanian administrative judiciary to create a balance between the parties to the administrative suits in the scope of administrative contracts.

whereas, the regular courts still competent to held the disputes of administrative contracts and not the administrative courts which would be an obstacle to implement the emergency situations theory and unexpected materialistic difficulty theory were created and adopted in France and Egypt.