professorspolitik och samhällsförändring government law was presented for the first time and, like Reuterskiöld, Sundberg took his models from the private lawmethods. He claimed that previous researchers, except, to some extent, Reuterskiöld, had merely described the statutes of administrative law without providing any guidance on matters of principle. One must now look for the ‘general principles’ that, with or without the will of the legislator, dominated the applicable law. Sundberg publishedKommunalrätt (Local Government Law) in 1936, a work that comprised an introduction to a systemisation of Swedish local government law. This book was throughout easy to understand and structured in apedagogic way. Sundbergwandered further from the paths taken by Rabenius in the 1860s, Blomberg in 1887 and Reuterskiöld in 1914 according to the German models. The term ‘municipality’ was dualnatured and activities could be of both of a private law and a public law nature. The ‘private’ part, whichwas called ‘own administration’ and followed the rules of private law, included, for example, constructing buildings, entering into contracts with contractors and selling electrical power. ‘Self-administration’, on the other hand, was involved when municipal bodies performed central government functions. This could involve granting building permits, taking children into care or conducting fire inspections. The municipal activity was then just a component of the activity of the State, although Sundberg had separated the municipalities in principle into a sector of society that was partly separate from the State. Sundberg put the citizens’ legal protection against intervention by the public sector at the core, which focussed attention on the procedure and not least the opportunity to appeal administrative decisions. Here he laid down rigid lines regarding which decisions may be appealed, what applies to an appeal subject, appeal facts, appeal grounds and time limits. He described the two main routes, which he referred to as ‘municipal appeals’ and ‘self-administration appeals’ One related to the appropriateness of the decision and the final instance was his Royal Majesty in the Council of State. The second applied to the legality, which was finally ruled on by his Royal Majesty’s Supreme Administrative Court. It was 282
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=