Administrative law and judicial review
Administrative law and judicial review
This domain tests control of public administration. Courts review legality, procedure, and discretion, not the political merits of a decision.
Core rules
- Ultra vires: an authority must act within its statutory powers; using power for an improper purpose or irrelevant considerations is unlawful.
- Procedural impropriety includes breach of natural justice: hearing the affected person and deciding without bias.
- Error of law is reviewable; error of fact is reviewable only in limited circumstances.
- Discretion must be exercised consistently, rationally, and proportionately where rights are affected; legitimate expectations may protect settled representations.
- Standing requires sufficient interest; exhaustion of administrative remedies and time limits usually apply.
- Remedies include annulment, mandamus, prohibition, declaration, and damages where statute allows.
Worked example
A licensing board revokes a permit without notice or hearing, relying on an anonymous complaint. The decision is annulled for procedural impropriety and possibly for relying on irrelevant, untested material. The court does not substitute its own view on whether the licence should issue; it remits for a lawful hearing.
Traps
Asking the court to review merit; ignoring bias; treating a policy as law; missing the time limit; assuming damages always follow annulment; confusing legitimate expectation with a vested right.