In case of using public property, a public administration entity may act unlawfully, in particular, when an authority’s decision is not implemented in the manner prescribed by law, or when there is unlawful inaction. Undoubtedly, in case an authorized person’s request is satisfied, a public administration entity, by virtue of, within the powers and in the manner established by law, is under the obligation to implement all of the appropriate and necessary measures, and to apply, change or cancel relevant public administration activity tools, make adequate decisions, and submit relevant requirements to third parties.

The purpose of this article is to elucidate the essence of public administration entity’s liability as an institute in the context of relations involving the use of public property. Further scientific research is required to understand the liability which public administration entities have in the context of relations involving the use of public property as legal relations of law enforcement and regulation in accordance with the functional criterion.

The article addresses the controversial aspects of determining the essence of public administration entity’s liability in the context of relations involving the use of public property with due regard for the European standards. The author interprets the essence of relations arising in connection with the use of public property, including in terms of the multidimensional subject measurement of the liability mechanism of public administration entities, and also the forms of the procedure for making public administration entities liable. The author elucidates the legal nature of liability which public administration entities have when using public property, and gives its definition in accordance with the functional criterion as legal relations of law enforcement and regulation, involving a mandatory participant which is the State represented by special-purpose bodies, and the offender (in particular, a public administration entity), which faces negative consequences and undertakes to fulfill additional obligations based on the coercion by the State, or in the preventive dimension – regulations established by provisions of law in terms of implementation of the mechanism of public administration entity’s liability for torts relating to public property use. The author investigated the social dimension of such liability.

The article proves that owing to understanding of the nature of public administration entity’s liability relating to public property use, if it is full and consistent with the current level of law and order, the development prospects of this liability as an institution may be characterized, in particular, in terms of payment of damages, irrespective of a prejudicial or extrajudicial decision used. The author shows the specifics of the theoretical and fundamental, objective and positive, and subjective institutional and procedural dimensions of public administration entity’s liability relating to the use of public property through the lens of anthropocentrism within the triad of regulative framework, subjective and objective dimension and substantial dynamics.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Demkova M ta Koba S, Lavrynenko I and Ukrainskyi D, Vidshkoduvannia v pozasudovomu poriadku shkody, yaka zavdana derzhavoiu abo orhanamy vlady [Out-ofCourt Reimbursement of Damages Inflicted by the State or Authorities] (Konus-Iu 2007) (in Ukrainian). 2. Samujel’son P and Barnett U, O chjom dumajut jekonomisty. Besedy s nobelevskimi laureatami [What Do Economists Think. Conversations with Nobel Laureates] (Al’pina Biznes Buks 2009) (in Russian).

Edited books

3. Lokhan H, ‘Osnovni pytannia vidpovidalnosti derzhavy za zapodiianu vladnymy diiamy shkodu (FRN)’ [‘Main Issues of State Responsibility for Damage Caused by Government Actions (Federal Republic of Germany)’] in Demkova M ta Koba S ta Lavrynenko I ta Ukrainskyi D, Vidshkoduvannia v pozasudovomu poriadku shkody, yaka zavdana derzhavoiu abo orhanamy vlady [Out-of-Court Reimbursement of Damages Inflicted by the State or Authorities] (Konus-Iu 2007) (in Ukrainian).

4. Melnyk R ta Bevzenko V, Zahalne administratyvne pravo: navchalnyi posibnyk [General Administrative Law: Tutorial] (Melnyk R red, Vaite 2014) (in Ukrainian).

5. Shmidt-Assmann E, Zahalne administratyvne pravo yak ideia vrehuliuvannia: osnovni zasady ta zavdannia systematyky administratyvnoho prava [General Administrative Law as an Idea of Regulation: Main Principles and Objectives of Administrative Law Taxonomy] (Syroid O red, Ryzhkov H ta Soiko I ta Bakanov A per, K.I.S. 2009) (in Ukrainian).

6. Gol’bah P, Svjashhennaja zaraza ili estestvennaja istorija sueverija. Politologija: hrestomatija [Sacred Infection or Natural History of Superstition. Politology: Chrestomathy] (Vasilik M sost, Gardariki 2000) (in Russian).

Journal articles

7. Carroll A, ‘A Three-Dimentional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance’ [1979] 4(4) Academy of Management Review 497-505 (in English).

8. Carroll A, ‘The Pyramid of Corporate Social responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders’ [1991] 34(4) Business Horizons 39-48 (in English).

9. Kalienichenko L, ‘Iurydychna vidpovidalnist yak yavyshche obiektyvnoho prava’ [‘Legal Liability as a Phenomenon of Objective Law’] [2016] 2(61) Law and Safety 31-7 (in Ukrainian). 10. Perminova H, ‘Analitychno-kontseptualni pidkhody do problemy korporatyvnoi sotsialnoi vidpovidalnosti’ [‘Analytical and Conceptual Approaches to the Issue of Corporate Social Responsibility’] [2013] 4(20) Proceedings of the National Technical University of Ukraine “Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”. Political science, Sociology and Law 81-4 (in Ukrainian).

11. Podorozhnii Ye, ‘Teoretychni pidkhody do vyznachennia poniattia “iurydychna vidpovidalnist”’ [‘Theoretical Approaches to Defining “Legal Liability”’] [2014] 3(66) Bulletin of Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs 6-15 (in Ukrainian).

12. Serdiuk I, ‘Metodolohichnyi analiz suchasnykh interpretatsii poniattia “iurydychna vidpovidalnist”’ [‘Methodological Analysis of Contemporary Interpretations of the “Legal Liability” Concept’] (2011) 1 Biuleten Ministerstva Yustytsii Ukrainy 30-5 (in Ukrainian).

13. Ukrainskyi D, ‘Vidshkoduvannia v administratyvnomu poriadku shkody, zavdanoi diianniamy orhaniv publichnoi administratsii’ [‘Compensation in the Administrative Procedure of Damage Caused by Acts of Public Administration Bodies’] (2007) 35 Current Problems of State and Law 207-11 (in Ukrainian).