Compensation for negative administrative decisions within the scope of administrative liability: A comparative study between Libya and Egypt

Abstract

This study examines the topic of "Compensation for Negative Administrative Decisions within the Scope of Administrative Liability," utilizing a comparative analytical approach between the legal and judicial systems in Libya and Egypt. The study addresses a core research problem: identifying the substantive and procedural conditions required to establish administrative liability when the administration abstains or refuses to take decisions that it is legally mandated to undertake, resulting in damages to individuals. The study is divided into two main sections; the first focuses on the legal framework, the conditions for admitting liability lawsuits, and their elements and procedures in both Libyan and Egyptian judiciaries. The second section reviews the consequences of establishing liability in terms of the nature of compensation (monetary and in-kind) and the criteria governing the judge's discretionary power in assessing it. The study concludes with a set of findings and recommendations, most notably the need to establish clearer legislative and judicial guidelines to regulate the judge's discretion in assessing compensation, ensuring a balance between protecting individual rights and preserving the public interest.