I. Формальные административные процедуры в США

Вид материалаРеферат
Подобный материал:
1   2   3   4   5

59 No State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

60 Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 US 254 (1970).

61 426 US 315 (1976).

62 ACUS Recommendation 68-6, Delegation of Final Decisional Authority Subject to Discretionary Review by the Agency, 1 CFR § 305.68-6 (1993); 29 CFR § 2200.91 (2000) (Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission; 17 CFR § 12.101, .106 (2000) (CFTC, reparation cases: “Voluntary Decisional Proceedings”).Работа, в которой обсуждаются дискреционные полномочия агентств, Gilliland, The Certiorary-Type Review, 26 Admin L. Rev. 53 (1974).

63 Примерами дел, в которых административный судья вышел за пределы предоставленных ему полномочий, вынеся решение в устной форме вопреки правилам или прецедентам в силе на тот период, являются Local Union No. 195, United Ass’n of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry, 237 NLRB 931, 99 LRRM 1098 (1978); Plastic Film Products Corp. and Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union, AFL-CIO 232 NLRB 722, 97 LRRM 1313 (1977).

64 Transcontinental Coach Type Service Case, 14 CAB 720 (1951). Cf., Michigan Consol. Gas Co. v. FPC, 203 F. 2d 895 (3d Cir. 1953).

65 In Northwest Air Service, Operating Authority, 32 CAB 89, 97-98 (1960), палата отклонила ходатайство о том, чтобы административный судья распорядился по поводу каждого предложения, сделанного сторонами.

66 Affiliation of Arizona Indian Centers, Inc. v. Dept. of Labor, 709 F. 2d 602 (9th Cir. 1983); P&Z Company, 6 OSHC (BNA) 1189,1977 OSHD P22, 055) (1977).

67 People for Environmental Enlightenment and Responsibility (PEER) v. Minnesota Environmental Quality Council, 266 N.W. 2d 858 (Minn. 1978).

68 Этот принцип основывается на более ранних прецедентах верховного суда, из которых следует, что эти определения не могут вытекать из других определений и заключений административного судьи. См., например, Yonkers v. United States, 320 U.S. 685 (1944); Wichita Railroad v. Public Utilities Commission, 260 U.S. 48 (1922). Cf., Penn Central Merger Cases, 389 U.S. 486 (1968).

69 A Uniform System of Citation (17th ed. 2000), commonly referred to as the “Harvard Blue Book”.

70 Mathias, The Use of Legal and Technical Assistants by the Administrative Law Judges in Administrative Proceedings, 1 Admin. L. J. 107 (1987).

71 Schwerman Trucking Co. v. Gartland Steamship Co., 496 F. 2d 466, 475 (7th Cir. 1974).

72 Home Box Office, Inc. v. FCC, 567 F. 2d 9 (D.C. Cir. 1977). Cf., Action for Children’s Television v. FCC, 564 F. 2d 468 (D.C. Cir. 1977); Sierra Club v. Costle, 657 F. 2d 298 (D.C. Cir. 1981).

73 Insurance Agents International Union, 119 NLRB 768 (1957), как показано в статье Joyce Krutlick Barlow, Alcoholism as a Disability Under the Social Security Act – An Analysis of the History, and Proposals for Change, 18 J. NAALJ 273, 290, n. 97 (1998), неповиновение – это политика федерального административного агентства, при которой агентство, вместо того, чтобы апеллировать невыгодное для себя решение суда, выбирает игнорирование его. В контексте заявлений в связи с неработоспособностью в службе социальной защиты, это стало причиной напряженности в течение многих лет.

74 Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. 35 (1975).

75 Flying Tiger-Additional Points Case, 58 CAB, 319, 322, 364, 365 (1971).

76 Это общая практика среди нижестоящих федеральных судов. См., например, U.S. v. Hayles, 492 F. 2d 125 (5th Cir. 1974).

77 См. Comment to Rule 400, supra.

78 17 CFR § 200.30-14(g)(5), (6).

79 Order Preliminary Whether to Issue Stay Sua Sponte and Establishing Guidelines for Seeking Stay Applications, Exchange Act Release No. 33870 (Apr. 7, 1994), 56 SEC Docket 1189, 1190-91 (Apr. 26, 1994). In re Hibbard, Brown & Co., et el., Admin. Proc. File No. 3-8418, SEC Press Release No. 94-72 (Aug. 2, 1994).

80 Rule 411(a), supra.

81 Section 8(a) or Section (c) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. §77h(a), (c), (2000) or the first sentence of Section 12(d) of the Securities Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78l(d) (2000).

82 Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78l(k) (2000).

83 Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §704.

84Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 § 25(a)(1).

85 Securities Exchange Act of 1934 §25; Fed. R. App. P. 18 [28 U.S.C. App.]

86 Supra.

87 Securities Act of 1933 [15 U.S.C § 77a et seq.]; Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [15 U.S.C. § 78a et seq.]; Trust Indenture Act of 1939 [15 U.S.C § 77aaa]; Investment Company Act of 1940 [15 U.S.C. § 80a et seq.], Investment Advisers Act of 1940 [15 U.S.C. § 80b et seq.]

88 §9(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940.

89 §4C(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Cf. Rule 102 (b), 102 (e) of the Rules of Practice 17 CFR 200 et seq. [Release No 34-35833; File No S7-40-94] .

90 Boddie v. Connecticut 401 U.S. 371 (1971) (and the cases cited therein).

91 Cf. Barry v. Barchi 443 U.S. 55 (1979), FDIC v. Mallen 486 U.S. 230 (1988).

92 See Securities Act § 8A(a), Securities Exchange Act §21C(c), Investment Company Act §9(f)(1).

93 See Comment (a)-(c) to Rule 510, supra.

94 Ray, supra, at 67; Guidance for Agency Dispute Resolution Specialists, supra, at 4-7.

95 Brazil, Kahn, Newman, & Gold, Early Neutral Evaluation: An Experimental Effort to Expedite Dispute Resolution, 69 Judicature 279 (1986).

96 Mullins, Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 5 Ad. L. J. 555, 568-69 (1991). (Эта комиссия изменила правила в 1992 году с тем, чтобы устранила правила, требующие установления конкретных обстоятельств на самой ранней стадии процесса. 57 FR 41676 (Sept. 11, 1992), однако, это справедливо относительно Федеральной комиссии по связи (FCC); См. 63 FR 690, at 1002, 1007, 10022 (January 7, 1998)

97 Administrative Conference of the United States, Recommendation 86-3: Agencies Use of Alternative Means of Dispute Resolutions, 1 CFR § 305.86-3 (1993).

98 Standards of Conduct for Mediators, #1, adopted in 1994 by the American Arbitration Association and the Society for Professionals in Dispute Resolution, reprinted in Sara A. Cole, Nancy H. Rogers, and Craig A. McCain, 2 Mediation: Law Policy and Practice, Appendix D, p. 2 (1994). Другой кодекс медиаторов провозглашает: “Это обязанность медиатора помочь сторонам прийти к соглашению. Ни в коем случае медиатор не должен оказывать на стороны давление для заключения соглашения”. Code of Professional Conduct developed by the Center for Dispute Resolution, Denver, Colorado, #1, reprinted in Edward A. Dauer, et al., 2 Manual of Dispute Resolution: ADR Law & Practice, Appendix G-1, Art. 1 (1996).

99 Ad Hoc Panel on Dispute Resolution and Public Policy, National Institute for Dispute Resolution, Paths to Justice: Major Public Policy Issues of Dispute Resolution 36-37 (1983), reprinted in Administrative Conference of the U.S., Sourcebook: Federal Agency Use of Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution 44-45 (1987).

100 14 CFR § 17.17, 17.31 (2000) (FAA, Procedures for Protests and Contract Disputes); 45 CFR §74.91 (2000) (Department of Health & Human Services, Awards and Subawards to Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, etc.); 45 CFR § 2540.230 (2000) (Department of Health & Human Services, grievance procedures re: Corporation for National and Community Services).

101 Правила National Credit Union Administration, 12 CFR § 709.8(c) (2) (2000).

102 Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 706 (a), 28 U.S.C. App. (2002).

103 Joseph & Gilbert, Breaking the Settlement Ice: The Use of Settlement Judges in Administrative Procedures, 3 Admin. L. J. 571, 573 (1989-90).

104 5 U.S.C. §§ 554(d), 557(d) (2002).

105 5 U.S.C. § 556(c) (2002).

106 16 CFR § 3.42(c) (7) (2000) (Federal Trade Commission, Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Procedures); 29 CFR § 417.6 (2000) (Procedures for Removal of Local Labor Organization Officers); 49 CFR § 386.54 (2000) (Motor Carrier Safety Regulations); 14 CFR § 1264.117(b)(3) (2000) (NASA, Implementation of the Program Fraud Civil Penalties Act of 1986, Authority of the presiding officer); 18 CFR § 157.205 (2000) (FERC, Interstate Pipeline Blanket Certificates, Notice Procedure); 33 CFR § 20.202(e) (2000) (Coast Guard, powers of administrative law judges).

107 Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, LLC, 210 F. 3d 524 (5th Cir. 2000) (applying equitable estoppel against production company and actor alleging tortious interference with a distribution agreement).

108 7 U.S.C. § 136a (c) (2) (B) (iii) (2002) (regarding arbitration to determine compensation for development of government-required data).

109 Edwards, Alternative Dispute Resolution: Panacea or Anathema, 99 Harvard L. Rev. 668 (1986); Ray, Emerging Options in Dispute Resolution, 75 A.B.A.J. 66 (June, 1989); Riggs & Dorminey, Federal Agencies’ Use of Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution, 1 ADMIN L. J. 125, 126 (1987); Sander, The Variety of Dispute Resolution, 70 F.R.D. 111 (1976).

110 5 U.S.C. §§ 554, 556, 557 (2002).

111 Bernard Schwartz, Administrative Law: A Casebook 62-65 (4th ed. 1994).

112 Harter, Dispute Resolution and Administrative Law, 29 Vill. L. Rev. 1393, 1403, n. 46 (1983-84).

113 Crowell & Pou, Appealing Government Contract Decisions: Reducing the Cost and Delay of Procurement Litigation with Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques, 1987 Recommendations and Reports of the Administrative Conference 1139; Crowell & Pou, Appealing Government Contract Decisions: Reducing the Cost and Delay of Procurement Litigation with Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques, 49 Md. L. Rev. 183 (1990).

114 Edelman, Carr, & Simon, ADR at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pou, Federal Agency Use of ADR: The Experience to Date, and Robinson, ADR in Enforcement Actions at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in Containing Legal Costs: ADR Strategies for Corporations, Law Firms, and Government (Fein, ed. 1987); A Colloquium on Improving Dispute Resolution: Options for the Federal Government, 1 Admin. L. Rev. 399 (1987).

115 В дополнение к названным выше изменениям федерального законодательства, которое регулирует административные процедуры напрямую можно также отметить 12 U.S.C. § 4806 (e) (2002) (требует пилотных программ ADR в агентствах, которые регулируют банковские и кредитные союзы); 20 U.S.C. §1415(e) (2002) (прямо перечисляет посредничество при разрешении споров, затрагивающих детей с заболеваниями в образовательных учреждениях, получающих федеральное финансирование) 26 U.S.C. §7123 (2002) (указывает Внутренней службе доходов установить альтернативные процедуры, добавлено в 1998 by P.L. 105-206).

116 Pub. L. No. 101-552, § 3(a).

117 Id. At § 3 (b) (См. также 5 U.S.C. § 581 note (2002)).

118 Administrative Dispute Resolution Act, Pub. L. No. 101-552, 104 Stat. 2736 (1990) (с изменениями нумерации секций Титула 5, сделанными Administrative Procedure Technical Amendments Act, Pub. L. No. 102-354, 106 Stat. 944 (1992)) (кодифицирован большей частью в 5 U.S.C. §§ 571-83, с кодификаций различных положений в в различных секциях Титулов 9, 28, 29 и 41). Последующие изменения были внесены Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, Act Oct. 1996, Pub. L. 104-320, 110 Stat. 3870 (внес изменения, среди прочего, в 5 U.S.C. §§ 569, 571, 571 note, 573, 574, 575, 580, 28 § 1491, 41 U.S.C. §605).

119 Administrative Conference of the U.S., The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act

120 L. Ray, Emerging Options in Dispute Resolutions, 75 A.B.A. JOURNAL 66 (June, 1989); ALI-ABA, Alternative Dispute Resolution: How to Use It to Your Advantage: ALI-ABA Course of Study Materials (1996); Jay Grenig, Alternative Dispute Resolution with Forms (2d ed 1997).

121 65 FR 38986, 39003 (June 22, 2000) (Commodities Futures Trading Commission) (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; new regulatory framework for multilateral transaction execution facilities, etc.); 65 FR 36888 (June 12, 2000) (Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Notice Announcing Reopening of Public Comment Period re: ADR for online consumer transactions); 65 FR 31131 (May 16, 2000) (Department of defence Proposed Rule re: Defense Logistics Agency Solicitations); 64 FR 61236, 61237 (November 10, 1999) (Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Notice of Proposed Rulemaking re: procedural rules); 64 FR 40138, 40158 (July 23, 1999) (Environmental Protection Agency, Final Rule, consolidated rules of practice for civil penalties, compliance orders, etc.).