Post by nurnobisorker65 on Feb 11, 2024 8:46:47 GMT
A gross error in the manager's conduct would only be appropriate in cases in which irregularities are detected that could result in the application of sanctions (fine and disqualification from holding a position on a commission or a position of trust). , for example) . This means, therefore, that such an investigation, in which the degree of guilt is investigated, with the aim of verifying the presence or absence of serious guilt, will not take place when the occurrence falls under the financial responsibility of the agent. This was what the TCU decided in Ruling 2391/2018-TCU-Plenário [4] , reported by minister Benjamin Zymler, whose excerpt from the vote leading to the ruling highlights the arguments to deny the application of.
article 28 of the Lindb to financial liability for losses to the treasury, in verbis : "146. This is because the changes promoted at Lindb, especially in article 28, did not cause a change in the requirements necessary for financial responsibility for debt. 147. The duty to compensate for losses to the treasury remains subject to proof of intent or guilt , without any gradation, as is customary within the scope of Belgium Email List aquilian responsibility, including for the purposes of returning to public administration, under the terms of article 37, § 6, of the Constitution: ' 6º Legal entities under public law and those under private law providing services of public services will be responsible for the damages that their agents, in this.
capacity, cause to third parties, ensuring the right of recourse against the person responsible in cases of intent or guilt'." In this way, the TCU recognizes the existence of two types of responsibility for public agents. One, with a punitive bias, which must be used in the application of sanctions, requiring intent or gross error — administrative liability; and the other, with a compensation bias, which would not be achieved by the concept of gross error, being disciplined by article 37, § 6 of CF/1988, requiring only intent or simple guilt [5] — financial liability. It is worth mentioning, in the exercise of controlling activity, the analysis of a gross error is reserved only for the application of sanctions, and does not extend to.
article 28 of the Lindb to financial liability for losses to the treasury, in verbis : "146. This is because the changes promoted at Lindb, especially in article 28, did not cause a change in the requirements necessary for financial responsibility for debt. 147. The duty to compensate for losses to the treasury remains subject to proof of intent or guilt , without any gradation, as is customary within the scope of Belgium Email List aquilian responsibility, including for the purposes of returning to public administration, under the terms of article 37, § 6, of the Constitution: ' 6º Legal entities under public law and those under private law providing services of public services will be responsible for the damages that their agents, in this.
capacity, cause to third parties, ensuring the right of recourse against the person responsible in cases of intent or guilt'." In this way, the TCU recognizes the existence of two types of responsibility for public agents. One, with a punitive bias, which must be used in the application of sanctions, requiring intent or gross error — administrative liability; and the other, with a compensation bias, which would not be achieved by the concept of gross error, being disciplined by article 37, § 6 of CF/1988, requiring only intent or simple guilt [5] — financial liability. It is worth mentioning, in the exercise of controlling activity, the analysis of a gross error is reserved only for the application of sanctions, and does not extend to.
