Approval gloss to the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 27 April 2023, ref. No. I OSK 663/22

Jan Chmielewski

Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5818-7339

Abstract

The aim of the article is to strengthen the statement of the Supreme Administrative Court expressed in the commented judgment regarding a case in which, due to the significant passage of time, it is not possible to provide direct
evidence confirming that compensation for the property taken over by the State was paid in the past. In other words, these are extremely difficult cases where, in the absence of administrative files and any information confirming
the fact that the proceedings are ongoing, public administration bodies have to lege artis decide, whether compensation should be paid for the takeover of
land to the State as part of the said proceedings (which – according to the applicant – never happened). Thus, determining the material truth is very problematic, and the authorities are forced to rely on factual inferences and
presumptions. The Glossator, fully approving the position of the Supreme Administrative Court, which led the adjudicating panel to the conclusion that compensation in the commented case had been paid, was trying to supplement the argumentation by referring to reasoning per analogiam and argumentum ex silentio – techniques appropriate for research on historical facts. These
techniques can be taking into account the existing differences applied to administrative proceedings to maximize the procedural directives resulting from
the principle of substantive truth. 

Keywords:

administrative law, expropriation proceedings, administrative files, administrative decision, conclusions, factual presumptions