{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"IRPA","provider_url":"https:\/\/archivio.irpa.eu\/en\/","author_name":"Watuppa","author_url":"https:\/\/archivio.irpa.eu\/en\/author\/gag\/","title":"The administrative labyrinth between discretion and rules - IRPA","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"H0LGaq3ZlQ\"><a href=\"https:\/\/archivio.irpa.eu\/en\/article\/il-labirinto-amministrativo-tra-discrezionalita-e-regole-2\/\">The administrative labyrinth between discretion and rules<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/archivio.irpa.eu\/en\/article\/il-labirinto-amministrativo-tra-discrezionalita-e-regole-2\/embed\/#?secret=H0LGaq3ZlQ\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"&#8220;The administrative labyrinth between discretion and rules&#8221; &#8212; IRPA\" data-secret=\"H0LGaq3ZlQ\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,d){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(d.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=d.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=d.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),l=0;l<n.length;l++)n[l].style.display=\"none\";for(l=0;l<i.length;l++)if(r=i[l],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=d.createElement(\"a\"),a=d.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,!o.test(a.protocol));else if(a.host===s.host)if(d.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),d.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=d.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Stefano Battini, Marco Macchia and Maurizia De Bellis discuss the \u00abMicula case\u00bb, related to the revocation of a public subsidy, a revocation which was challenged by the beneficiaries of the subsidy itself \u2014 the Micula brothers \u2014 for alleged breach of the principle of legitimate expectation. The scholars address the most significant issues raised in"}