Appeal before the administrative court

What is an appeal before the administrative court?

The Appeal to the administrative court is the judicial procedure allowing any person to contest a decision taken by a public administration that he considers illegal or prejudicial to his interests. This procedure falls under the administrative law and guarantees respect for the fundamental principle of the rule of law: any administrative act may be subject to the supervision of an independent judge.

The administrative tribunal represents the first instance of administrative jurisdiction in France. It rules on the legality of decisions taken by the administrative authorities of the State, local authorities, local authorities, public institutions, and certain private organizations responsible for a public service mission, such as the Family Allowances Fund (CAF) or the Primary Health Insurance Fund (CPAM). Concretely, these decisions can concern a wide variety of areas: urban planning (refusal of building permits), public service (disciplinary sanctions, refusal of tenure), taxation (tax adjustments), foreigners (obligations to leave the territory), foreigners (obligations to leave the territory), environment (ICPE authorizations), environment (ICPE authorizations), public contracts, social assistance, and many others.

An appeal before the administrative court allows you to obtain either theCancellation of the contested decision (recourse for excess of power), or the Condemnation of the administration to pay compensation in compensation for damage (full litigation), or again theinterpretation or assessment of legality of an administrative act. Moreover, this procedure is part of an approach that may have been preceded by prior administrative appeals, thus offering the administration an opportunity to review its decision before referring it to the judge.

Prior administrative remedies: a step that is often necessary

Exempt redress: asking the administration to reconsider its decision

The free remedy constitutes a prior administrative remedy by which the person concerned requests the author himself of the decision to review it and possibly to withdraw or modify it. This appeal is therefore addressed directly to the department or authority that took the contested decision: the mayor for a refusal of a building permit, the prefect for an OQTF, the director of administration for a disciplinary sanction.

Free recourse has several advantages. It makes it possible to obtain a review of the decision without initiating litigation, in a framework that is more flexible and less formal than judicial recourse. The administration may recognize an error, take into account new elements, or agree to negotiate a transactional solution. Concretely, many disputes thus find a favorable outcome without requiring the intervention of the judge, saving time and procedural costs.

To be valid, an ex gratia remedy must respect certain fitness requirements. It should be formulated in writing, preferably by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt to have proof of its sending and receiving. The letter must clearly state that it is an ex gratia remedy, state the reasons for the dispute in a precise manner, and explicitly request that the decision be reviewed with, where appropriate, proposals for solutions.

Hierarchical recourse: requesting the intervention of the superior

The Hierarchical recourse differs from an ex gratia remedy in that it is addressed not to the author of the decision, but to his line manager. This remedy is based on the principle of subordination existing in the administrative organization: any agent or service is placed under the authority of a superior who can control his actions and, if necessary, reform them.

Concretely, an appeal against a decision of a departmental director will be sent to the regional director or the competent minister, an appeal against a decision of an academy rector will be sent to the Minister of National Education. The determination of the hierarchically superior authority can sometimes present difficulties and require knowledge of the administrative organization.

A hierarchical appeal has the advantage of submitting the contested decision to the assessment of an authority that is not bound by the considerations that motivated the original author. This higher authority may have a broader vision of the case, be more sensitive to legal arguments, or take a different position on issues of opportunity. Moreover, hierarchical recourse can have a deterrent effect on decisions that are clearly illegal or disproportionate.

The legal effects of prior administrative remedies

The filing of an ex gratia or hierarchical appeal produces significant legal effects on the time limits for litigation. When such an appeal is filed within the initial period, generally two months after notification of the decision, it Interrupt this delay and opens a new period, generally of two months, to refer the matter to the administrative court from the date of the decision on the contentious appeal.

The administration generally has a period of two months to respond to administrative recourse without charge or hierarchy. If she does not respond within this period, the appeal is deemed rejected by implicit decision. This implicit rejection generally gives rise to a further period of two months in which to refer the matter to the administrative court. In concrete terms, except for certain specific cases such as the appeal against building permits issued after November 27, 2025, administrative recourse without charge or hierarchical therefore makes it possible to extend the time limits for litigation, offering more time to prepare legal arguments and gather evidence.

In addition, if the administration responds positively to administrative recourse that is ex gratia or hierarchical by withdrawing or modifying its initial decision, the dispute can be resolved without the intervention of the judge. In the event of a partially favorable response, the administrator may choose to accept this solution or to challenge the decision taken on the appeal before the administrative court, insofar as it does not fully satisfy his requests.

Deadlines for bringing an action before the administrative court

The basic deadline: two months from the date of notification

The time limit for litigation before the administrative court is, in principle, to two months from the date of notification, publication or availability of the contested administrative decision. This deadline is a fundamental rule of administrative litigation and its non-compliance leads toinadmissibility of the appeal for foreclosure, that is, the final impossibility of challenging the decision.

The starting point of the deadline is precisely determined: it is the Day after the day where the decision was notified to the person concerned (hand-delivered, receipt of a registered letter), published in the Compendium of Administrative Acts, or posted in accordance with legal procedures. It is a Free time, which means that the day of notification or publication does not count, and if the last day of the deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or public holiday, the deadline is extended to the next working day.

For the appeal period to be enforceable against the person responsible, the administrative decision must clearly mention the Remedies and deadlines. This mandatory statement must indicate that an appeal may be filed before the administrative tribunal, specify the period within which such recourse must be exercised, and indicate the possibility of exercising a prior administrative appeal, if applicable. If this mention is absent or insufficient, the appeal deadlines may not be enforceable against the person concerned, allowing him to challenge the decision within a much longer period of time.

Specific deadlines according to the geographical location

The time limit for litigation may be extended depending on the geographical location of the applicant or of the place where the competent administrative court sits. These extensions are intended to take into account the practical communication difficulties associated with remoteness and to ensure equal access to the judge.

For residents In metropolitan France and contesting a decision of a metropolitan authority before a metropolitan administrative court, the principle period of two months applies without modification. On the other hand, if the applicant resides in an overseas department or community and if the competent administrative court is located in mainland France (or vice versa), the appeal period is extended to Three months.

For residents abroad and having to refer the matter to an administrative court in France, the appeal period is extended to four months from the date of notification of the decision. This extension takes into account international postal delivery times and the practical difficulties in compiling a file from abroad.

Exemption deadlines in certain disputes

Some specific litigation comply with specific appeal periods, which are generally shorter, due to the urgency to decide or the nature of the disputes. Electoral litigation is the most emblematic example of these derogatory deadlines. To dispute the transactions of a Municipal election, the appeal period is only five days as of the announcement of the results.

In addition, some administrative decisions may be the subject of a mandatory prior administrative remedy (RAPO) before any referral to the administrative court. In these cases, the period for litigation only runs from the explicit or implicit decision rejecting this mandatory administrative appeal. This procedure applies in particular in matters of public service, pension, or in certain social security disputes.

Preparing an effective request

Precise identification of the parties to the dispute

The application to institute proceedings before the administrative tribunal must include a complete and accurate identification of all parties to the dispute. The applicant (the person contesting the decision) must indicate their name, first name, date and place of birth, home or head office, as well as his telephone and electronic contact details to enable the court registry to communicate with him throughout the proceedings.

If the applicant is a legal person (company, association, union), it is appropriate to mention its full corporate name, its legal form, its SIRET number, the address of its head office, and the identity of its legal representative. For associations, it is necessary to verify that they have the legal capacity to take legal action, generally acquired by declaring them in the prefecture and publishing them in the Official Journal.

The defendant (the administration that took the contested decision) must also be precisely identified: exact name of the administration, full address and, if possible, identification of the department or authority that took the decision. An error in identifying the defendant can lead to procedural difficulties, even if the administrative judge is pragmatic and generally agrees to regularize these formal errors.

The statement of facts: clarity and chronology

THEStatement of facts is an essential part of the request. It must present in a manner clear, precise and chronological all the circumstances that led to the dispute and resulted in the contested administrative decision. This statement allows the judge to understand the context of the dispute and to assess the scope of the legal arguments that will be developed later.

Concretely, the statement of facts must retrace the history of the situation: the steps taken by the applicant to the administration: the requests made, the documents produced, the exchanges of letters, any interviews, the initial decision of the administration, the initial decision of the administration, the prior administrative remedies exercised and their outcomes. Each factual element should be dated and, if possible, supported by supporting documentation.

The talk should stay objective and factual, avoiding value judgments, controversies, or personal attacks on administrative agents. The tone should be measured and respectful of jurisdiction. Moreover, only the facts relevant to the dispute should be mentioned, excluding digressions or details that are unrelated to the legal issues at issue. The conciseness and clarity of the presentation facilitate the work of the judge and reinforce the credibility of the request.

The means of law: the construction of legal arguments

Les Means of law are the core of the request. They expose the legal arguments demonstrating the illegality of the contested administrative decision. These means must be structured in a clear manner, generally by distinguishing the different types of illegalities invoked: external illegality (procedural defect, incompetence of the author of the act), internal illegality (violation of the law, error of fact, error of fact, error of fact, error of law, error of law, error of law, error of law, misuse of power, misuse of procedure, lack of legal basis, error of assessment).

Each means must be developed with precision by citing legislative or regulatory texts unknown by the administration, by possibly referring to relevant case law (decisions of the Council of State or administrative courts of appeal on similar issues), and by explaining why and how the contested decision violates these texts or principles. Concretely, it is not enough to say that the decision is illegal: this illegality must be demonstrated by rigorous legal reasoning.

In addition, it is recommended to prioritize the means, starting with the most robust and the most likely to win the conviction of the judge. Some ways can be peremptories, that is to say, they necessarily lead to the annulment of the decision if they are accepted by the judge (incompetence of the author of the act, substantial procedural defect). Other means require a more nuanced assessment on the part of the judge (in particular, a manifest error of assessment).

The formulation of the conclusions: specific requests

Les conclusions of the request must be formulated in a manner clear and precise what the applicant is requesting from the administrative court. In an appeal for excess of power, the main request generally relates toCancellation of the contested administrative decision. This request for cancellation must refer precisely to the decision in question by mentioning its date, purpose, and the authority that took it.

The applicant may also request theCancellation of all rejection decisions any prior administrative remedies (ex gratia appeal, hierarchical appeal) that he was able to file. Indeed, these rejection decisions constitute detachable administrative acts that can be contested at the same time as the initial decision. In addition, the applicant may request the annulment of other related administrative acts that are also unlawful.

In a full-blown appeal, in particular when the applicant invokes administrative responsibility, the findings must specify the Amount of benefits claimed in compensation for the damage suffered. These compensation claims must be accurately quantified and justified by evidence (invoices, certificates, expertise). The applicant may also request the ordering the administration to pay the costs and the payment of a sum under article L. 761-1 of the Code of Administrative Justice to cover unrepeatable costs (in particular lawyer fees).

Supporting documents: creating a complete file

The request must be accompanied by all supporting documents making it possible to establish the facts and demonstrate the validity of the pleas invoked. These pieces should be organized methodically and inventoried in a summary sheet indicating the number of each piece and its nature. This organization facilitates the work of the judge and the registry, and avoids the loss or confusion of documents.

The essential parts to be produced include: the contested administrative decision and its notification, any decisions to reject prior administrative appeals, all letters exchanged with the administration, administrative documents obtained by the applicant (authorization file, expert reports), supporting documents of his personal situation (civil status, contracts, contracts, pay slips, medical certificates depending on the dispute), and any relevant evidence (photographs, certificates, press articles).

In concrete terms, only parts should be produced. useful and relevant for litigation, avoiding overwhelming the court with documents that are unrelated to the legal issues at issue. All parts must be legible : poor quality photocopies should be avoided, and documents written in a foreign language should be accompanied by a certified translation. In addition, it is recommended to keep the originals of all documents and to send only copies to the court.

Reasons for contesting an administrative decision

Violation of the law or external illegality

The first ground for the annulment of an administrative decision lies in the Violation of the law in a broad sense, including the Constitution, international treaties, laws in the strict sense, regulations, and general principles of law. The administrative judge monitors the legality of the decision in the light of all of these legal norms that are applicable to the administration.

THEincompetence of the author of the act constitutes a particularly serious defect. Any administrative authority can only act within the limits of the powers assigned to it by the texts. If a decision is taken by an incompetent authority (for example a mayor taking a decision under the competence of the prefect), this decision is vitiated by a defect that necessarily leads to its cancellation. Concretely, the judge verifies that the author of the act does have the power to take it.

Les procedural flaws are also common reasons for cancellations. The administration must respect the procedures prescribed by the texts before taking certain decisions: consultation with advisory bodies, communication of the file to the person concerned, respect for the adversarial principle, reasons for the decision. The omission of a substantial formality or the irregularity in its completion results in the illegality of the decision. Moreover, the judge distinguishes between substantial formalities, the violation of which leads to annulment, from simple irregularities that have no impact on the decision.

The error of fact and the error of law

THEError of fact occurs when the administration bases its decision on materially inaccurate facts or on an erroneous assessment of the factual situation. For example, a disciplinary sanction pronounced against an agent who did not commit the alleged acts, a refusal of a residence permit based on an incorrect length of residence in France, or a refusal of a building permit motivated by factually inaccurate considerations.

The applicant must demonstrate the error of fact by producing evidence: official documents, testimonies, expert opinions, photographs. The judge checks whether the facts as they result from the file correspond to those retained by the administration. Concretely, the error of fact can relate to the very existence of a fact (the administration affirms that an event occurred when it did not occur), to the qualification of an event (the administration legally erroneously qualifies a situation), or to the date of an event.

THEError of law occurs when the administration misapplies or misinterprets legal rules. This error may consist in applying a text that is inapplicable to the situation, in not applying the applicable text, or in misinterpreting legal or regulatory provisions. For example, a refusal to obtain a building permit based on an urban planning rule that does not apply to the project, or the application of a legal regime that is inadequate to the situation of the person concerned.

The manifest error of assessment

THEmanifest error of assessment constitutes a defect that allows the administrative judge to review decisions involving administrative discretion. When the administration has a leeway in its decision (choice whether or not to grant authorization, assessment of the appropriateness of a measure), the judge exercises only limited control over the assessment made, but he censures obvious errors.

A manifest error of assessment is characterized by blatant disproportion between the real situation and the assessment made by the administration. Concretely, these are such gross mistakes that no normally diligent administration could have committed them. For example, considering that a person poses a serious threat to public order despite not having committed any offence, or refusing an administrative advantage based on reasons that are completely unsuited to the situation.

The control of manifest error of assessment applies in many areas: administrative police, urban planning, civil service, immigration law. The judge verifies that the assessment made by the administration is not patently erroneous in the light of the circumstances of the case. Moreover, in certain particularly sensitive areas (public freedoms, fundamental rights), the judge exercises a reinforced control going beyond simply looking for a manifest error and verifying the strict proportionality of the decision.

Misuse of power

The Misuse of power is the most serious defect in administrative law, but also the most difficult to establish. It occurs when the administrative authority uses its powers for a purpose other than that for which they were given to him. In concrete terms, the administration takes a decision for reasons unrelated to the general interest or for personal reasons.

Cases of abuse of power can take various forms: taking a decision to harm a specific person, using administrative police power for financial purposes (rather than to protect public order), taking disciplinary action for discriminatory reasons or in retaliation for a legitimate exercise of rights. The misuse of power always implies a deliberate intent of the administration to use its powers in a roundabout way.

Proof of the misuse of power is particularly difficult to report because it requires demonstrating the true intentions of the administration beyond the reasons stated in the decision. The applicant must produce consistent elements revealing that the official reasons for the decision do not correspond to his real motivations: internal correspondence, public statements, the particular context of the decision, inconsistency between the reasons given and the measures taken.

The procedure before the administrative court

The filing of the request and its registration

The application can be filed with the administrative court according to: two modalities at the choice of the applicant. The first consists of a mailing by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt sent to the registry of the competent administrative court. The filing date of the application corresponds to the date the mail was sent as it appears on the postmark, not the date it was received by the court.

The second modality, which is becoming more and more preferred, consists of a electronic filing via the app Telecourse accessible on the website of the administrative courts. This dematerialized procedure makes it possible to file the request at any time (including non-working days), to immediately receive an electronic acknowledgement of receipt, and to follow the evolution of the online procedure. In addition, Telecourse allows the dematerialized exchange of all memories and documents throughout the proceeding.

When it arrives at the Registry, the request is the subject of a registration and is assigned a roll number that will allow the file to be monitored. The registry summarily verifies that the request meets the minimum admissibility requirements and sends the applicant an acknowledgement of receipt. The request is then sent to the rapporteur appointed to investigate the case. In concrete terms, the applicant must carefully keep the acknowledgement of receipt and the roll number, which are essential for any subsequent communication with the court.

The adversarial investigation phase

After registering the request, start the Instruction phase which aims to gather all the elements necessary for the trial of the case. This phase, led by the Judge-Rapporteur, takes place according to the principle of contradictory : each party must be aware of the arguments and documents produced by the other party and be able to reply to them.

The court registry notifies the request to therespondent administration which has a period, generally of two months, to produce a Dissertation in defense. In this memorandum, the administration replies to the pleas raised by the appellant, contests the alleged facts, develops its own legal arguments justifying the legality of its decision, and produces the documents for the administrative file. The defence brief is sent to the appellant, who may reply by a Replica memory.

During the investigation, the reporting judge may ask the parties to produce complementary parts, details on certain points, or to answer specific questions. He can also order educational measures : expertise, investigation, site visits, witness interviews. These measures are relatively rare in administrative litigation but may be necessary in certain complex disputes requiring technical elements.

The public hearing and the debates

When the investigation is complete, the case is registered with the Role of a public hearing. The parties are informed of the hearing date by a summons from the court office, generally several weeks in advance. The hearing takes place publicly in the courtroom of the Administrative Court, with exceptions for cases requiring the preservation of personal secrecy or privacy, where behind closed doors may be preferred.

During the hearing, the Public rapporteur (formerly Government Commissioner) presents its conclusions : it sets out the facts and the procedure, analyzes the arguments raised by the parties, presents the applicable case law, and formulates a solution proposal to the dispute. The conclusions of the public rapporteur are independent and do not involve the formation of judgment, but they have an important influence on the final decision.

After the intervention of the public rapporteur, the parties or their solicitors can present short oral observations to complete their writings and respond to the conclusions of the public rapporteur. Concretely, attendance at the hearing is not mandatory and many cases are judged on the basis of written briefs alone. However, presence makes it possible to answer the questions of the court and can be decisive in complex or sensitive cases.

Judgment and its effects

At the end of the hearing, the court withdrew to Deliberate. The deliberation is not public and the judgment is delivered at a later date, usually within a few weeks to a few months depending on the workload of the court. The judgment is notified to the parties by the Registry and must be motivated, that is, explain the legal reasons that led the court to its decision.

The judgment can dismiss the appeal if he considers that the administrative decision is legal or that the pleas invoked are unfounded. He can cancel the contested decision in whole or in part if he considers it unlawful. Cancellation has a retroactive effect : the decision is supposed to never have existed. The administration must then draw all the consequences of the cancellation and put the person administered back in the situation that would have been theirs if the illegal decision had not been taken.

In some cases, the court may order the cancellation ofinjunctions ordering the administration to carry out certain measures within a specified period of time: to review the applicant's situation, to take a new decision, to pay compensation. In addition, the court may order a On-call (sum of money per day of delay) to force the administration to enforce the judgment. Concretely, the enforcement of administrative court decisions has improved considerably in recent years thanks to these coercive mechanisms.

Remedies against the judgment of the administrative court

Appeal before the Administrative Court of Appeal

The judgment rendered by the administrative court may be the subject of a inrush In front of the Administrative Court of Appeal territorially competent. The appeal must be filed in a period of two months from the date of notification of the judgment. This remedy allows the case to be referred to a second level of jurisdiction which reviews the merits of the dispute, both on questions of fact and on questions of law.

The appeal can be made by any party to the dispute who considers himself aggrieved by the judgment: the original applicant if his application was rejected, the administration if the judgment upheld the complainant's claims. The call has nosuspensive effect : the judgment of first instance is enforceable until the Administrative Court of Appeal rules, unless the court decides otherwise.

The procedure before the Administrative Court of Appeal follows the same principles as before the administrative tribunal: adversarial investigation, exchange of briefs, conclusions of the public rapporteur, public hearing, deliberation. THEstopping rendered by the court supersedes the judgment of the administrative tribunal. The court can confirm the judgment, overturn it in whole or in part, or refer to the case (decide on the merits itself if the case is ready to be tried).

The cassation appeal before the Council of State

Against the judgment delivered by the Administrative Court of Appeal, a Appeal in cassation can be formed in front of the Council of State within two months from the date of notification of the judgment. The cassation appeal does not constitute a third level of jurisdiction examining the merits of the case: it is a review of the legality of the contested judgment dealing only with questions of law.

The Council of State verifies that the Administrative Court of Appeal correctly applied the rules of law, that it did not commit an error in the legal characterization of the facts, and that it respected the general principles of the procedure. On the other hand, the Council of State does not review the facts established by the trial judges and does not reassess the evidence. Les Means of cassation are limited and need to be invoked accurately.

If the Council of State considers the appeal to be well-founded, it Break the stop attacked and refers the case back to the Administrative Court of Appeal (usually another than the one that issued the overturned judgment) for a new decision by applying the law correctly. In some cases, when the case is ready for trial, the Council of State may Ruling on the bottom and make a final decision on the dispute. If the appeal is dismissed, the judgment of the court becomes final.

Extraordinary remedies

Beyond ordinary remedies, some exceptional remedies make it possible to challenge an administrative court decision that has become final in very limited circumstances. The Recourse for review may be formed when new elements, unknown at the time of the judgment, are likely to change the solution of the dispute. This recourse is rare and strictly regulated.

La Third party opposition allows a person who was not a party to the dispute but whose interests are affected by the judgment to request a review of the decision. Concretely, this remedy is used when a judgment has an effect on a person who was not put in a position to assert their rights during the initial proceedings.

Finally, the Recourse for the correction of a material error makes it possible to correct purely material errors affecting a judgment: calculation errors, omissions, contradictions between the device and the reasons. This appeal does not allow the substance of the decision to be called into question but only to rectify obvious errors. In addition, theopposition may be brought against a judgment rendered in default when a party has not been duly summoned to the hearing.

The role of the lawyer in administrative litigation

Optional or mandatory assistance depending on the litigation

Before the administrative court, the Representation by lawyer is not mandatory in most disputes. The appellant may file an appeal himself and defend himself throughout the proceedings. This option guarantees access to the administrative judge for all parties involved, including those who do not have significant financial resources.

However, in some specific litigation, representation by lawyer is obligatory : contracts and public contracts, liability of public persons for damage caused by public works, certain disputes relating to elections, tax litigation before the administrative courts of appeal and the Council of State. In these matters, the application must be submitted by a lawyer to the Council of State and the Court of Cassation or by a lawyer registered at the bar.

Even when legal representation is optional, it remains highly recommended taking into account the technical nature of administrative law and the rigor of the litigation procedure. A lawyer who is an expert in public law masters the rules of jurisdiction, the time limits for appeals, the subtleties of legal arguments, and applicable case law. Its assistance considerably increases the chances of a successful appeal and avoids procedural errors leading to inadmissibility.

The expertise of the lawyer in public law

THEpublic law lawyer has specific expertise that is essential to effectively conduct administrative litigation. He masters the fundamental principles of administrative law: separation of administrative and judicial authorities, regime of administrative responsibility, theory of unilateral administrative acts, regulatory power, administrative police.

This expertise allows the lawyer toidentify legal means the most relevant to challenge an administrative decision, to articulate them consistently in the request, and to respond effectively to the arguments developed by the administration in its defense. The lawyer is familiar with recent case law and can invoke the decisions of the Council of State or administrative courts of appeal favorable to the situation of his client.

In addition, a lawyer in public law generally maintains professional relationships with the legal services of the administrations, the magistrates of the administrative courts, and the public rapporteurs. This knowledge of the administrative judicial environment allows it to understand local practices, to anticipate the probable positions of the court, and to adapt its litigation strategy accordingly. Concretely, the lawyer knows whether it is preferable to give priority to arguments based on form or substance, whether to request an investigative measure, or whether to seek a negotiated solution with the administration.

Global support for the plaintiff

Beyond the sole drafting of the request, the lawyer ensures a comprehensive support of the litigant throughout the litigation procedure. He advises his client on theopportunity to file an appeal assessing the chances of success in the light of case law and the solidity of the resources available. It may advise against recourse that is clearly doomed to failure in order to avoid unnecessary costs and the crystallization of an unfavorable decision.

The lawyer manages all of the proceeding : drafting and filing of the application, exchange of briefs with the administration, production of additional documents requested by the judge, preparation of the hearing, presentation of oral observations, follow-up of the execution of the judgment. He keeps his client informed of the evolution of the case and supports him in the strategic decisions to be made (whether or not to accept a transaction proposal, to file an appeal against the judgment or not).

In addition, the lawyer can intervene in Upstream of litigation to advise his client on the steps to be taken with the administration, draft prior administrative appeals, negotiate with the administrative services to find an amicable solution to the dispute. This preventive intervention often makes it possible to avoid referral to the judge by obtaining satisfaction in the context of an ex gratia or hierarchical appeal. Concretely, the avocado constitutes a privileged interlocutor between the litigant and the administration, facilitating dialogue and the search for pragmatic solutions.

Conclusion: recourse to the administrative tribunal, guarantor of the rule of law

The Appeal to the administrative court constitutes an essential pillar of the rule of law in France, guaranteeing any person liable to challenge the decisions of the administrative authorities and to obtain compensation in the event of illegality or harm. This judicial procedure ensures the control of the legality of administrative action and protects the rights and freedoms of citizens in relation to public authorities.

The administrative litigation procedure, although supervised by strict rules in terms of time, form and motivation, remains accessible thanks to the ability to go to court without mandatory representation by lawyer in most disputes. However, the technical nature of administrative law and the complexity of certain disputes makeassistance from a lawyer with expertise in public law highly recommended, even essential to secure the chances of success.

Les prior administrative remedies (ex gratia and hierarchical remedies) are an important step that should not be overlooked, often allowing disputes to be resolved without judicial intervention and offering, in any event, an extension of the time limits for litigation. For any person facing an unfavorable administrative decision, the rapid consultation of a public law lawyer makes it possible to assess the available remedies and to take appropriate steps within the time limit set.

Legal sources and references

• Code of Administrative Justice, in particular articles L. 211-1 et seq. relating to the jurisdiction of the administrative court and articles R. 411-1 et seq. relating to the litigation procedure
• Law No. 79-587 of 11 July 1979 relating to the motivation of administrative acts and to the improvement of relations between the administration and the public
• Law No. 2000-321 of 12 April 2000 on the rights of citizens in their relationships with public authorities
• Decree No. 2018-251 of 6 April 2018 relating to the dematerialization of procedures before administrative courts (Telecourse)
• Jurisprudence of the Council of State and administrative courts of appeal
• Documentation from specialized sites: service-public.fr, legifrance.gouv.fr, vie-publique.fr, sites of administrative courts

‍