Invalidity of the Administrative Contract, Compared to the Civil Contract A Comparative Jurisprudential Study

10.2478/bjlp-2023-000002

Abstract

Administrative law is one of the branches of public law. It is concerned with a set of rules that govern and control the administration in many respects. Various departments carry out their activities and systems through the administrative decisions issued by them, which are binding on different individuals in order to achieve their goals and ambitions. Departments also resort to another means to achieve their goals through cooperation with another party or another team within the so-called administrative contracts. An administrative contract is an agreement that includes the administration being one of the parties or both parties of the contract with the aim of organizing a public utility. The administration uses the privileges provided by the public authority. Contentment, location, reason, and formality are the most important pillars of the administrative contract. It is not right to neglect one of them. Fulfilling the formalities on contracting, submitting bids, designating the entity on which the bid is awarded, and concluding the contract are the most important procedures that are followed in order to conclude the administrative contract. The criterion of administration as a party of the contract, the criterion of the contract's connection with the public utility, and the criterion of exceptional conditions are the most prominent criteria that distinguish administrative contracts from other contracts. The present study reveals the most important cases of invalidity of the administrative contract compared to the civil contract. The present study is divided into three sections and a conclusion containing the results and recommendations of the present study.