English abstract
All administrative decision, whatever its authority, discretionary or restricted, must be based on a reason for its issuance, and this is a cornerstone of the administrative decision. The reason is the availability of the legal or factual situation that empowers the competent administrative authority to intervene to issue an administrative decision. In the opposite sense, the absence of reason means that there is no legal or factual situation justifying its issuance, and therefore that authority has no right to intervene to issue its administrative decision. Despite the absence of that legal or factual situation, and issued its administrative decision, this decision is considered illegal because it is defective and therefore can be revoked. The general rule established in the jurisprudence of administrative law is that the administration is not obliged to cause its administrative decisions, unless the law explicitly states that the reason should be given. In this case, the administration is obliged to cause its decisions. If the law does not oblige the administrative authority to cause the administrative decision when issuing it, the administration may issue the decision without stating its reasons. In this case, the decision assumes that it was based on the correct reason, and this quarantine shall remain until the plaintiff proves the contrary. In other words, if the administration does not disclose the reason for issuing its decision, because there is no text required to cause it, the burden of proving the fault lies with the appellant, which is a heavy and difficult burden. Therefore, the judiciary tries to reduce the burden on individuals.
