In the practice of issuing administrative decisions, a negative trend can be seen, consisting in the appeal authorities abusing decisions that annul decisions and remand cases for reexamination. This problem is compounded by another one: the first-instance authorities, when re-examining the case, therefore after their decision has been annulled by the second-instance authority, repeat the same mistakes they made previously. In an attempt to limit this practice, the legislature introduced into the regulation on general administrative procedure the requirement that in the decision annulling the previous one and remanding the case for reexamination the appellate authority must provide guidelines for interpreting the provisions of law. The article outlines the major legal issues surrounding the regulation of guidelines. The first issue that is determined is whether they are binding in nature, which would enable the appellate authority to influence the first instance authority. Next, it is determined whether the subject-matter of guidelines for interpreting the provisions of law may be exclusively the provisions of formal law, which seems intuitively justified by the place of the regulations constituting the basis for issuing guidelines in the internal systematics of the Code of Administrative Procedure. These issues are presented against the background of views expounded in legal scholarship and current case law of administrative courts.