For the administration of justice there must be courts. It is usually said that the administration of justice should be cheap, fast and safe and that the courts' tasks should be streamlined so that they can devote themselves to the administration of justice. A large number of statements of this kind can be found in the legislative history of our courts. However, the central concept of administration of justice is not defined, not even in the Constitution, although there is some discussion of the dynamic nature of the concept. This means that it changes over time: what was justice yesterday may not be justice today. The purpose of the project is to examine the concept of administration of justice in Swedish law in general proceedings (criminal and civil cases) and administrative proceedings, among other things to show how its content has changed over time. The study will be based on a number of well-known criteria (e.g. the reviewing body and its composition, the right to an oral hearing, the possibility of appeal, enforceability). These are intended to provide a descriptive attempt to classify different types of cases and procedures as judicial or other forms of judicial review. On the basis of the data collection, the criteria used and the objectives of judicial review, a normative concept of the administration of justice will then be formulated, with a view to formulating a minimum level of activity that should be called the administration of justice.