In a landmark judgment issued on 12 May 2025, the Supreme Constitutional Court of Cyprus, sitting in its appellate capacity, signalled a significant shift in the judicial review of administrative acts, particularly in competition law. The ruling departs from the long-standing approach of the Administrative Court, which traditionally refrained from examining issues it characterised as “technical”, thereby limiting judicial scrutiny over matters deemed to fall within the technical competence of the administrative authority.

Under this previous approach, the Administrative Court granted a wide margin of discretion to administrative authorities in relation to technical determinations. In the context of competition law, for example, where an applicant challenged the Commission for the Protection of Competition’s finding that a company held a dominant position in the market, the Court would typically not assess the substance of that determination, considering it a matter best left to the specialised authority.

The Supreme Constitutional Court rejected this restrictive interpretation. It held that when grounds for annulment concern the legality of the administrative act (such as an error of law or fact, lack of due investigation, or insufficient reasoning) these must be examined substantively, even where they are intertwined with technical assessments.

The judgment draws heavily on case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), reaffirming that administrative authorities, including competition bodies, are not insulated from judicial scrutiny merely because their decisions involve economic or technical elements. In particular, the Court referenced Tetra Laval BV (C-12/03 P) and E.ON Energie AG (C-89/11), where the CJEU confirmed that while the Commission enjoys a margin of appreciation in complex assessments, this does not exempt its conclusions from judicial review. Courts must verify the accuracy, reliability, and completeness of the evidence relied upon. Similar principles were applied in Microsoft Corp v Commission (T-201/04), which emphasised that technical findings must meet legal standards of justification.

Drawing on this jurisprudence, the Supreme Constitutional Court affirmed that technical complexity cannot shield administrative decisions from legal accountability. When reviewing acts under Article 146 of the Constitution, Cypriot courts must assess whether the administrative authority has properly justified its conclusions, conducted an adequate investigation, and avoided legal or factual error. The mere existence of technical data does not place a decision beyond review.

This decision recalibrates the balance between deference to administrative expertise and the constitutional role of judicial oversight, bringing Cypriot administrative law into closer alignment with EU principles of effective judicial protection. Its implications extend beyond competition law to any area involving specialised administrative determinations, from telecommunications to energy and financial markets, where oversight must address not just form, but substance.

While courts may not substitute their judgment for that of the administrative authority, technical matters no longer form a scrutiny-free zone. Courts must evaluate whether such determinations are adequately justified - and importantly, explain why.

The ruling is a welcome development and marks a pivotal moment in Cypriot public law, as it reinforces both the scope and substance of judicial review.

Read more on Administrative Law:

• A Practical Guide to Administrative Law in Cyprus
• Interim Orders in Citizenship Revocation Proceedings: Focused Guide and Recent Legal Developments
• Recent Developments in Revocation of Cyprus Citizenship for Foreign Investors
• Guide to AG Collins’ Opinion on Malta’s Citizenship by Investment Program: Key Legal Considerations