This paper aims to present a comparative analysis of legal remedies under the General Administrative Procedure Act (Official Gazette 53/91, 103/96) and the General Administrative Procedure Act (OG 47/09). Legal remedies are those that give the possibility of correcting any mistakes and failures in solving them. The first part of the paper refers to the General Administrative Procedure Act (Official Gazette 53/91, 103/96) which provides regular and legal remedies of specific performance. Regular remedies are appeals against decisions as well as appeals against the conclusions; specific remedies are: renewal of a proceeding, request for protection of legality, modification and annulment of administrative dispute decisions, annulment and termination of the right of supervision, termination and modification of the final decision with the consent or at the request of the party, extraordinary abolition and the pronouncement of the decision null and void. The second part of the final work refers to the General Administrative Procedure Act (OG 47/09), in which appeal is one of the regular correction methods, which may be pronounced after the first-instance ruling, while an appeal cannot be filed against the second-instance ruling, but an administrative dispute may arise. The second regular remedy is an objection that can be filed against an administrative contract or other conduct by a public body or a provider of public services. In addition to these legal remedies, there are also remedies of specific performance that under certain assumptions allow for the removal of illegality, namely: reinstatement of the procedure, cancellation and termination of the solution and pronouncing of the decision null and void.