A new legal principle: accepting a lawsuit after fulfilling the mandatory appeal process
The Supreme Administrative Court established an important judicial principle that enhances the guarantees of litigation and protects the rights of plaintiffs, as it affirmed that filing a lawsuit before the administrative judiciary after fulfilling the mandatory grievance procedures is a correct procedure, and it is not valid to plead that the lawsuit is inadmissible due to prior adjudication, in the event that the previous ruling was issued with inadmissibility due to failure to fulfill this formal condition.
Details of the new judicial principle
The court explained in its reasoning that the dispute in the subsequent case is brought before the court after the procedures have been corrected and the mandatory appeal . Therefore, adjudicating the case after this condition has been met does not constitute a repetition of a previous ruling, but rather a review of a case that has fulfilled all the formal requirements stipulated by law.
This principle comes to settle the debate about cases in which lawsuits are rejected on procedural grounds for failure to appeal, stressing that this rejection does not close the door to litigation permanently, but rather gives the plaintiff an opportunity to correct his legal course and return to claim his right.
The facts of the case and the application of the principle
The case upon which this principle is based stems from an academic's lawsuit before the Administrative Court seeking the annulment of an administrative decision that removed him from his academic position. Initially, the court ruled the case inadmissible due to the absence of the mandatory appeal procedure, a requirement stipulated by law before resorting to the courts in employment disputes.
Consequently, the plaintiff filed the mandatory grievance with the administrative body and then refiled the case before the Board of Grievances. However, he was surprised to find that the case was inadmissible due to a previous ruling. At this point, the Supreme Administrative Court intervened after the plaintiff's objection, overturning the ruling and remanding the case to the Administrative Court of Appeal for a decision on its merits, thus upholding the right to litigation after fulfilling the necessary conditions.
The importance of mandatory grievance in the Saudi system
Mandatory appeals are a crucial stage in the Saudi administrative justice system, particularly in cases related to civil service matters and disciplinary decisions. This procedure aims to give the administrative body an opportunity to review its decisions and correct potential errors amicably before the dispute reaches the courts, thus reducing the burden on the judiciary and expediting the course of justice.
This new principle reflects the Board of Grievances’ to ensure that formal procedures do not hinder rights holders from accessing their rights, as long as the procedural deficiency is addressed within the specified regulatory timeframes.
Developments in administrative justice and keeping pace with the vision
The administrative judiciary in the Kingdom is witnessing a rapid qualitative development that keeps pace with the objectives of the Kingdom’s Vision 2030, whether through the comprehensive digital transformation via the “Moeen” digital platform that facilitated litigation procedures, or through the development of the legislative structure and the establishment of judicial principles that achieve effective justice.
These principles established by the Supreme Administrative Court contribute to unifying judicial interpretations and spreading legal culture among practitioners and specialists, which enhances transparency, increases beneficiaries’ confidence in the justice system, and confirms the Kingdom’s leadership in the field of administrative justice regionally and internationally.
