| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.66 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
A presente investigação pretende, acima de qualquer outro fim, reflectir sobre os alicerces teóricos da solução legal que postula a impossibilidade de a Administra-ção poder invalidar unilateralmente os contratos que celebra e que se encontra expressa no número 1 do artigo 307.º do CCP. O problema fundamental que se discutirá é, no essencial, o de saber o que subjaz à regra que impede a Administração de invalidar, unilateralmente e sem recurso ao acordo do co-contratante ou ao poder judicial, os contratos administrativos em que figura como parte. Tradicionalmente, têm sido apontadas diversas justificações para a aceitação desta solução, como sejam razões históricas, a bilateralidade do contrato, a boa-fé ou a reserva de jurisdição. Após a análise da conveniência de cada um destes fundamentos, verifica-se que os mesmos revelam fragilidades e poderão abrir caminho a fundamentos que advoguem uma solução contrária.
Propomo-nos, ainda, a abordar as consequências da emissão de uma declaração administrativa de invalidade de um contrato administrativo, nomeadamente sobre o alcance que a norma do artigo 307.º do CCP pode oferecer nesta matéria, nomeadamente quando exista uma concordância do co-contratante quanto a essa declaração administrativa.
The present investigation intends, above all other purposes, to reflect on the theoretical foundations of the legal solution that postulates the impossibility of the Administration being able to unilaterally invalidate the contracts that it celebrates and which is expressed in number 1 of article 307 of the PCC. The basic problem which will be discussed is essentially the question of what underlies the rule which prevents the Administration from unilaterally and without recourse to the agreement of the contracting party or the judiciary invalidating the administrative contracts in which it appears as a party. Traditionally, several justifications have been pointed out for the acceptance of this solution, such as historical reasons, the bilateralism of the contract, good faith or reservation of jurisdiction. After analyzing the appropriateness of each of these grounds, it appears that they reveal weaknesses and may pave the way for grounds that advocate a counter-solution We also propose to address the consequences of issuing an administrative declaration of invalidity of an administrative contract, in particular on the extent to which the provision of Article 307 of the CCP can provide in this regard.
The present investigation intends, above all other purposes, to reflect on the theoretical foundations of the legal solution that postulates the impossibility of the Administration being able to unilaterally invalidate the contracts that it celebrates and which is expressed in number 1 of article 307 of the PCC. The basic problem which will be discussed is essentially the question of what underlies the rule which prevents the Administration from unilaterally and without recourse to the agreement of the contracting party or the judiciary invalidating the administrative contracts in which it appears as a party. Traditionally, several justifications have been pointed out for the acceptance of this solution, such as historical reasons, the bilateralism of the contract, good faith or reservation of jurisdiction. After analyzing the appropriateness of each of these grounds, it appears that they reveal weaknesses and may pave the way for grounds that advocate a counter-solution We also propose to address the consequences of issuing an administrative declaration of invalidity of an administrative contract, in particular on the extent to which the provision of Article 307 of the CCP can provide in this regard.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Direito administrativo Contrato administrativo Acto administrativo Invalidade Teses de mestrado - 2019
