Public Administration

A private individual went to the Superior Court of Justice (TSJ) filing an appeal for the Administration's inactivity to compel it to carry out what he considered a final act obtained through positive administrative silence . According to his argument, this "presumed act" would have recognized his reversion right over some surplus expropriated assets (that is, assets that would no longer be necessary for the purpose of the expropriation). The TSJ ruled in his favor and ordered the initiation of proceedings to establish a substitute compensation .

The Administration, however, argued that there was no presumed final act because it had indeed responded , there were denial responses , even if they were in the form of informative communications that, as discussed, were not a "formal" resolution. In addition, the appellant had confirmed their receipt. Therefore, the Administration appealed to the Supreme Court (TS).

The Supreme Court establishes doctrine stating that in appeals due to inactivity (such as reversion appeals), the court must first verify whether there is a final administrative act (express or by positive silence) recognizing the right; only if it exists, the lack of response to the execution request can be considered "inactivity". In this case, the Supreme Court understands that there was no silence, because the request was repeatedly answered , although not as the applicant wanted, and those denial acts could have been challenged. Denial cannot be confused with silence, and furthermore, the response arrived before the deadline expired. If you feel aggrieved and dissatisfied with a decision by the Administration, our professionals are at your disposal for the defense of your interests