Judicial review of administrative acts: limits, systems, and theories of expansion

Abstract

This article examines the judicial control of administrative acts by the Brazilian Judiciary, highlighting the need to balance administrative discretion with the protection of citizens' rights. Administrative acts, due to their unilateral nature, carry attributes that grant them presumption of legality and authority, but also entail the risk of arbitrariness if not properly supervised. In this context, judicial intervention emerges as an essential instrument for safeguarding the Democratic Rule of Law, ensuring that the exercise of public power occurs within the limits imposed by the legal system. The research offers an analysis of the distinction between binding and discretionary acts, stressing how this classification influences the extent of judicial review. It also examines the single jurisdiction system adopted in Brazil, which grants the Judiciary exclusive competence for the definitive settlement of disputes, in contrast to the administrative jurisdiction system observed in other countries. Finally, it discusses the main theories supporting the expansion of judicial control, with emphasis on the theory of determining reasons, as well as concepts such as juridicity, reasonableness, and proportionality. Based on doctrine and case law, it argues for the importance of reconciling the principle of separation of powers with the effective judicial protection of fundamental rights.