In the first instance, the administrative procedure consists of various stages of administrative decision-making that serve as the foundation for the recognition of material legal rights or legal benefits or the imposition of obligations on the party to the procedure. The first stage is the introduction of a procedure[1], followed by a declaratory[2] and evidentiary[3] procedure. The final and most important stage is the issuance of a substantive decision[4] (which may also include a decision that does not, in general, imply a decision on the content of an administrative matter), which is a concrete administrative act that decides on the right to an obligation or legal benefit. Acts that do not constitute a decision on a party’s right, obligation, or legal benefit in a particular administrative case are not decisions.

There is a formality among the above characteristics of concrete administrative acts, and the decision must be issued in the prescribed form, which is usually in writing[5]. It includes an introduction, the operative part of the judgement, an explanation, information about available legal remedies, the signature of an official person, and the authority’s stamp. The most important of these is the operative part (disposition), which decides on the party’s right, obligation, or legal benefit in an administrative case that is the subject of the entire procedure and on all claims of the parties. Only the operative part of the decision becomes final, legally binding, and enforceable, so it must be brief and precise (sixth paragraph of Article 213 of the ZUP).

Due to legal certainty, the issued decision creates a legal relationship that must be (become) immutable. Immutability refers to a decision that cannot be reversed, annulled, or amended, for which the institutes of finality and res judicata are intended.[6]

Unless the law provides otherwise, the final decision is the one that cannot (no longer) be challenged by an appeal, and the party may begin exercising the right, according to Article 224 of the General Administrative Procedure Act (ZUP). In the first paragraph, Article 225 of the ZUP states that a decision is final when it can no longer be challenged in an administrative dispute or other court proceedings, and it confers rights or imposes obligations on the party. Only extraordinary remedies for the most serious infringements are possible. The use of ordinary remedies is excluded by the final decision, which is marked by a decision that cannot be appealed or an administrative dispute initiated. The latter conditions must be met in order to speak of formal finality, which only binds the party (which cannot initiate an administrative dispute).

Aside from the decision’s positivity, formal finality is a prerequisite for the occurrence of substantive legal force, which implies the finality of the public law relationship specified in the operative part. Substantive legal force is thus the finality of the decision’s content, which binds the party and the body[7] and implies the application of abstract legal norms to the established factual situation in a specific administrative case.

The final stage of administrative proceedings in which the legal relationship expressed in the operative part of the decision is enforced is referred to as enforcement. Only in the case of condemnatory decisions, where the party is imposed with duties or obligations that have not been fulfilled voluntarily, can enforcement occur. The basis for enforcement necessitates the use of an instrument permitting enforcement.[8]

[1]Administrative proceedings may be initiated at the request of a party or ex officio (Article 125 of the ZUP).

[2]The purpose of the declaratory procedure is to establish all the facts and circumstances that are important for the decision and to enable the parties to exercise and protect their rights or legal benefits (Article 138 of the ZUP). As a rule, a declaratory procedure is specific if the reasons for the shortened declaratory procedure are not given.

[3]The evidentiary procedure is intertwined with the declaratory procedure, since the evidentiary procedure proves what has been established in the declaratory procedure, taking into account the principle of substantive truth and is particularly important for the issuance of a decision.

[4]It can also be named differently, e.g. authorisation, consent, certificate, etc.

[5]It may also be spoken orally, where permitted by law or a statutory regulation.

[6]P o Vilko Androjna, Erik Kerševan, UPRAVNO PROCESNO PRAVO, GV Založba, Ljubljana 2006, p. 435

[7]Ibid, p. 439

[8]An instrument permitting enforcement can be an enforceable decision, an enforceable order, or a concluded settlement.