Post by account_disabled on Mar 12, 2024 1:05:26 GMT -5
In short, we are faced with an ordinary appeal (appeal, says the law) that, in addition, incorporates a privilege of the Administration of necessary restrictive interpretation, so the fundamental idea here that the knowledge of the ORT or, previously, that of the Treasury Delegation, makes it presumed without the possibility of proof to the contrary that of any body of the same public administration, which cannot thus rely on ignorance or lack of knowledge of the act that is being appealed. without violating the most basic requirements of good faith , in order to prolong the terms, even to rehabilitate them once they have expired.
Grades
[1] The Chamber adds that “(…) the period for executing Email Data a resolution is not the same as the period for filing an appeal nor, apparently, is the notification triggering both actions ontologically of the same nature and significance.
Substantially, there is no difference between the communication regime in both areas, if it is taken into account that the arguments of our jurisprudence actually cover the entire activity of the Administration. When the principle of single legal personality is invoked - which links all the bodies or dependencies of the same Administration and groups them under a single governing will and action - or that of good administration - which, basically, prevents the Administration from claiming ignorance of what, as such, necessarily knows or should reasonably know, is a valid premise both for executing administrative resolutions (in judicial resolutions, in addition, the knowledge of the AE as the recipient of the resolutions and direct source of administrative knowledge intervenes), as well as to file claims and appeals.
Furthermore, if it is possible to appreciate, for dialectical purposes, a difference between both communications, it would be with an effect contrary to that preached by the EA, because in the case of administrative execution , it is possible to admit an added need, a precaution that the resolution reaches to the body in question, the call to execute the ruling or administrative resolution - regardless of what was said about the entry into the AEAT -, since that body is responsible for the execution and must know what is to be executed, how and when - without prejudice to the fact that the eventual procedural knowledge of the AE, in the cases in which it possesses it, ipso iure implies that of the Administration that it legally represents and assists, thereby following the same scheme that invariably governs with the representation of individuals.”Movie heists that happened in real life.
Diamonds, banks... there are times when reality is stranger than fiction.