Abstract

This research examines non-monetary compensation in the Saudi administrative judiciary under the Law of Procedure before the Board of Grievances and the Law of Civil Procedure. It addresses non-monetary compensation as a form of judicial redress that does not depend on ordering the administrative authority to pay a sum of money, but rather aims to remove the harm itself, eliminate its effects, or correct the injured party’s legal position. The importance of the topic lies in the fact that certain damages resulting from administrative decisions or acts cannot be adequately remedied by monetary compensation alone, especially where the harm relates to an employment status, a disciplinary effect, a procedural right, or a legal position capable of being restored. The research discusses the concept of non-monetary compensation and distinguishes it from monetary compensation, annulment actions, and the enforcement of administrative judgments. Monetary compensation is based on awarding a financial equivalent for the damage, whereas non-monetary compensation seeks to correct the legal or factual situation affected by the unlawful administrative act. Likewise, an annulment action is directed against the unlawful administrative decision itself, while non-monetary compensation aims to remedy the personal damage resulting from that decision or from other administrative acts. The study further explains that non-monetary compensation rests on two complementary foundations. The first is a Sharia-based foundation, derived from the principles of removing harm, restoring rights, and avoiding the removal of harm by causing a greater harm. The second is a statutory foundation, represented by the jurisdiction of the Board of Grievances over compensation claims, the procedural rules under the Law of Procedure before the Board of Grievances, the general rules of the Law of Civil Procedure, and the Law of Enforcement before the Board of Grievances, which strengthens the effectiveness of administrative judgments with non-monetary effects. The research also analyzes the conditions governing non-monetary compensation. These include the existence of direct, personal, and established damage; the suitability of such damage for non-financial redress; the legal and practical possibility of restoring the previous situation; the clarity and enforceability of the judgment; and the need to avoid prejudice to public interest, third-party rights, or the stability of legal positions. The study also highlights the main applications of non-monetary compensation in disputes involving administrative decisions, public employment, disciplinary sanctions, administrative contracts, and the enforcement of administrative judgments. The research concludes that non-monetary compensation may serve as an effective means of achieving administrative justice, provided that it is applied within strict limits and does not allow the administrative judge to replace the administration or interfere with its discretionary powers. The study recommends greater doctrinal and judicial attention to this form of compensation, clearer identification of its conditions and effects, and stronger linkage with mechanisms for enforcing administrative judgments in order to protect rights and uphold the principle of legality.

Keywords

Non-monetary compensation; Saudi administrative judiciary; Board of Grievances; administrative liability; in-kind compensation; annulment action; the system of litigation before the Board of Grievances; the Sharia litigation system.