The first view of administrative ju

The first view of administrative justice, which, for instance, is to a large extent
characteristic of the French system, is based on the notion of recours objectif.
According to this view, the main aim of judicial protection against administrative
behavior is to check whether an administrative body has acted lawfully and within
the scope of its powers. Judicial review thus mainly serves a public interest, namely
the interest that the executive should not act unlawfully. Of course, it is an
individual who brings a claim before the court, and he or she does so in order to
protect his or her own interests. And yet, in the view of recours objectif, this
individual acts, in a way, as an “instrument” to allow the court to check the legality
of the administrative behavior. The protection of the applicant’s legal sphere is thus
a by-product of the judicial review process, not its main objective.
In the recours objectif view, the political opponent of the mayor who challenges the refusal
of a building permit functions primarily as an instrument of the public interest that makes
the administration use its competences for the purposes for which they were given. A
possible “by-product” would be that the opponent also gets his building permit.
9.4.2.3 Recours Subjectif
The second continental view on administrative justice, which characterizes for
instance the German system, is based on the notion of recours subjectif. According
to this view, the aim of judicial protection against administrative behavior lies not
so much in the check on the executive but in the protection of the individual’s legal
position. The primary task of a court that reviews administrative action is therefore
not to determine whether the administration has acted lawfully but rather to
determine whether the legal position of private actors has been violated. Of course,
these two aims may partially overlap in some situations, but, as we shall see below
(Sect. 9.6), this is not always the case.
Consider again the example of a refusal to grant a building permit, inspired by the mayor’s
wish not to have his political opponent as a neighbor. If the opponent challenges this refusal
before a court, he does so in order to protect his rights. Under the doctrine of recours
subjectif, this would be the primary function of this lawsuit. That the administration is
forced to comply with the demands of legality would merely be a welcome “by-product.”