Administrative procedure

In a selection process (for example, an opposition or competition), an agreement was published that affected an applicant. Upon seeing it, the interested party wanted to challenge it and, to better prepare his appeal, requested via email to be sent certain documentation . At the same time, he requested that the deadline be extended to submit the appeal for reversal, relying on art.32 of the Law on Common Administrative Procedure (LPAC), which regulates the possibility of extending deadlines in some cases.

The issue was that the Administration sent him the documentation when, according to the legal calculation, the one-month deadline to lodge the appeal for reversal had already one month to lodge the appeal for reversal and would have ended (LPAC art. 122.1). However, the interested party later filed the appeal. The Administration declared it inadmissible as untimely , that is, for having arrived out of time. His idea was clear and it was that the request for an extension could not "revive" a deadline that was already expired.

The matter reached the Supreme Court (TS), and the appellant tried to challenge the inadmissibility using the special procedure for the protection of fundamental rights . Both the State Attorney's Office and the Public Prosecutor argued that this was not the appropriate route . Essentially, the TS confirmed the untimeliness since the deadline for the appeal is preclusive (expires) and obliges both citizens and the Administration itself (LPAC art. 29), and must be calculated in accordance with the general rules (LPAC art. 30.4 and 30.5).

Furthermore, the TS emphasizes that there is no " automatic right " to have the deadline extended with a suspension effect, that is, requesting the extension does not suspend the deadline by itself nor does it imply that the Administration has tacitly accepted it, because the extension is discretionary and requires evaluating circumstances (LPAC art. 32). And, in this case, it was also not proven that it was materially impossible to submit the appeal within the deadline. The Supreme Court concludes with a practical idea, it would have been prudent to appeal in time , even if documentation was missing , in order not to miss the opportunity to challenge.

If you feel aggrieved and dissatisfied with a decision of the Administration, our professionals are at your disposal for the defense of your interests