Legitimate Expectations A legitimate expectation will arise in the mind of the complainant wherever he or she has been led to understand — by the words or actions of the decision maker — that certain procedures will be followed in reaching a decision.
Based on an obvious misinterpretation of the relevant statutory provision, In ignorance of it, Expressly founded on reasons which are wrong in law Non-consideration of relevant material: A Legitimate Expectation amounts to an expectation of receiving some benefit or privilege to which the individual has no right.
The first is where an individual or group has been led to believe that a certain procedure will apply. In another it is taking into consideration extraneous matters.
So it will often be impossible to be entirely sure, in advance of litigation, whether any particular applicant has a sufficient interest.
Some recent criticisms of the judiciary may have come about because of a failure to understand the constitutional implications of the HRA. The role of the courts was seen as enforcing the "will of Parliament" in accordance with the doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty.
Fulham Corporation[v], the authority was empowered under the statute to establish washhouses for the non-commercial use of local residents. They could not originate their action under the general civil law procedure, because that would be avoiding the procedural safeguards afforded to public authorities by the judicial review procedure, such as the requirement of sufficient interest, timely submission and permission for judicial review.
However, such exclusion has to be expressly stated if it is needed to have effect in limiting or eliminating the inherent power of the court.
Court may review an administrative action on the ground that the authority exercised jurisdiction which did not belong to it. Improper delegation The usual cases where improper delegation has been made out are those where a body responsible for a decision decided to let its judgment be formed by a body over which it had no control.
It may, in its discretion, examine all the circumstances of the case and see if the substantive grounds for judicial review are serious enough.
Constitutional position[ edit ] The English constitutional theory, as expounded by A.
Finally, the court generalized: However, neither side had made an objection to their hearing the case. A relevant consideration is one that the court would say must be taken into account.
Last modified on Wednesday, 02 May Fairness or Procedural impropriety Fairness demands that a public body should never act so unfairly that it amounts to an abuse of power.
In Hind Construction Co.Judicial review is a procedure by which a person can seek to challenge a decision, act or failure to act of a public body. This could be a government department or local authority, or another body exercising a public law function such as an NHS Trust. The first two grounds are known as substantive grounds of judicial review because they relate to the substance of the disputed decision.
Procedural impropriety is a procedural ground because it is aimed at the decision-making procedure rather than the content of the decision itself.
The Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act (Cth) (“ADJR Act”) (s 5) lists the grounds of judicial review, which largely reflect the common law grounds at both federal and state levels, as. Grounds of Judicial Review CHAPTER – 1 GROUNDS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW INTRODUCTION “Public law is not at base about rights, even though abuses of power may and often do invade private rights; it is about wrongs – that is to say misuses of public power - Grounds of Judicial Review introduction.
SPICe Briefing Judicial Review 8 July 16/62 Sarah Harvie-Clark Judicial review is the process by which a court reviews a decision, act or failure to act by a who can bring an action for judicial review, what the grounds of judicial review are, and the remedies that can be awarded by the court if an action for judicial review is.
May 16, · Grounds for judicial review Judicial review can be sought on the grounds that a decision is: illegal - arises when a decision-maker misdirects itself in law, exercises a power wrongly, or improperly purports to exercise a power that it does not have, which is known as acting 'ultra vires'.Download