This article offers a comprehensive theoretical and legal analysis of the concept of legitimate expectations as a doctrinal principle that defines the boundaries of discretionary powers exercised by public administration in a democratic legal order. The relevance of studying legitimate expectations as a limitation on administrative discretion lies in the urgent need to ensure legal certainty, predictability, and stability in public administration. Contemporary legal practice demonstrates a growing tendency to employ this category as a means of restraining arbitrary interference by administrative authorities in the realm of private rights. At the same time, the lack of proper normative recognition of the principle of legitimate expectations in Ukrainian legislation creates gaps in protecting good-faith recipients of public policy.The purpose of the article is to provide a doctrinal justification for the principle of legitimate expectations as a limit to administrative discretion and to clarify its legal nature within the context of both Ukrainian and comparative administrative law. The study adopts an interdisciplinary methodological approach, combining elements of legal philosophy, comparative legal studies, and doctrinal legal analysis. The novelty of the article lies in the conceptualization of legitimate expectations as an ethical and legal obligation of the administration to adhere to its own promises, interpretations, and established practices, even in the absence of a formal administrative act. The author argues that legitimate expectations should be regarded not merely as a procedural protection mechanism but as a fundamental legal category that reflects the ethical and normative responsibility of public authorities for developing a stable, predictable, and consistent administrative practice. A core thesis of the article is that when public administration generates reasonable trust in its future conduct, it may not change its policy, decision, or practice arbitrarily and without justification, especially when doing so would harm individuals who relied on those expectations. The study finds that the principle of legitimate expectations serves as both a tool of legal stabilization and a mechanism for constraining administrative arbitrariness. The analysis of judicial practice in Ukraine, the European Union, Germany, France, the United States, and Poland reveals the emergence of common approaches to safeguarding trust and predictability in public governance. It is shown that legitimate expectations are increasingly recognized by courts as a standard for assessing the legality of discretionary administrative actions, even in the absence of explicit legal norms. The conclusion substantiates the necessity of formally recognizing the principle of legitimate expectations as one of the general foundations of Ukrainian administrative law. It is argued that the integration of this principle into administrative procedure legislation, codes of ethics for public officials, and judicial review standards would promote a more responsible, accountable, and predictable public administration.

Authored books

1. Craig P, EU Administrative Law (3-rd ed, Oxford University Press 2018).

2. Rowe G C, Hofmann H C H, Türk A, Administrative law and policy of the European Union (Oxford University Press 2011).

3. Schwarze J, European Administrative Law (2nd ed, Sweet & Maxwell 2006).

4. Hordieiev V, Poniattia yurydychnykh faktiv v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy (Helvetyka 2021) (in Ukrainian).

Edited books

5. Kolpakov V, ‘Obgruntuvannia administratyvnoho prava’, Administratyvne pravo Ukrainy: pidruchnyk (Kuzmenko O, Chorna V red, Yurinkom Inter 2025) 15–139 (in Ukrainian). 6. Kolpakov V, ‘Predmet (vidnosyny), metod i doktryna administratyvnoho prava’, Administratyvne pravo Ukrainy: pidruchnyk (P Dikhtiievskyi red., Liudmyla 2023) 90–120 (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

7. Kolomoets T, Kolpakov V, Kovbas I, ‘Anticorruption Constraints as a Manifestation of the “Coherent Force” of Human Rights in the Activities of Public Administration Actors’ [2020] 7(2) European Journal of Law and Public Administration 80–91. DOI: https://doi. org/10.18662/eljpa/7.2/129

8. Tate P, ‘The coherence of “Legitimate Expectations” and the Foundation of Natural Justice’ [1988] 14 Monash University Law Review 48–49.

9. Bernaziuk Ya, ‘Lehitymni ochikuvannia (reasonable expectations) yak skladova pryntsypu yurydychnoi vyznachenosti u vitchyznianii ta yevropeiskii sudovii praktytsi’ [2021] 2(94) Visnyk Luhanskoho derzhavnoho universytetu vnutrishnikh sprav imeni E. O. Didorenka 13–28 (in Ukrainian).

10. Mahrelo M, ‘Kontsept zakonnykh ochikuvan v pryntsyp yurydychnoi vyznachenosti: prychynno-naslidkovyi chy symbiotychnyi zv’iazok?’ [2013] 3 Naukovi zapysky Instytutu zakonodavstva Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy 127–134 (in Ukrainian).

11. Solotkyi S, ‘Ontolohichnyi zmist lehitymnykh ochikuvan u konteksti konstytutsiinopravovoho zakhystu prav liudyny’ [2023] 1(25) Filosofski ta metodolohichni problemy prava 171–179 (in Ukrainian).