15. Challenging Governmental Decisions: The Process

2021 ◽  
pp. 405-427
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Family Practitioner ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Technical Area ◽  
Legal Procedures

This chapter examines the legal procedures an applicant must follow when challenging a government decision and explores how court decisions in this nominally very technical area of administrative law can have profound implications for the meaning in practical terms of such broad constitutional principles as the rule of law and the sovereignty of Parliament. The chapter begins by examining the historical duality with English administrative law of the mechanism through which citizens might question the lawfulness of government action. The chapter then continues to cover the case of Barnard v National Dock Labour Board; the Order 53 reforms; the case of O’Reilly v Mackman (1982); the post-O’Reilly case law; the case of Roy v Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster Family Practitioner Committee; and public law principle as a defence in criminal proceedings.

15. Challenging Governmental Decisions: The Process

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Family Practitioner ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Government Action ◽  
Government Decision ◽  
Legal Procedures

This chapter examines the legal procedures an applicant must follow when challenging a government decision. It starts by examining the historical duality with English administrative law of the mechanism through which citizens might question the lawfulness of government action. The chapter then continues to cover the case of Barnard v National Dock Labour Board; the Order 53 reforms; the case of O’Reilly v Mackman (1982); the post-O’Reilly case law; the case of Roy v Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster Family Practitioner Committee; and public law principle as a defence in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals A Judicial Review of the De Facto Detention of Foreigners in Turkey

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-153
Author(s):  
Gamze Ovacik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Administrative Practices ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Law

The term, de facto detention, refers to instances in which foreigners are held or deprived of their liberty usually with a view to preventing their entry into a country or expelling them from a country, but without implementing a legally prescribed detention regime that satisfies the criteria of the rule of law. The first type of de facto detention occurs when provisions regulating detention are absent or deficient in the legal framework. The second type takes place when domestic law sufficiently regulates detention regimes; however, the law is not duly implemented in practice. This article examines judicial practices in Turkey in both categories of de facto detention, analysing 37 Turkish court decisions with supporting case law from the European Court of Human Rights. Focusing on case law makes it possible both to track deficiencies in administrative practices and to analyse judicial response as a tool for rectifying unlawful administrative practices.

14. Procedural Grounds of Judicial Review

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Partial Picture ◽  
The Law ◽  
Modern Era ◽  
Do So

This chapter examines the procedural grounds of judicial review. It discusses how the courts have used the procedural fairness doctrine by reviewing a number of leading cases to identify the values that appear to be shaping the content of the law. The analysis focuses on case law drawn from the ‘modern’ (ie post-1960) era, but several seminal decisions from earlier periods are also considered. The concept of procedural fairness has generated a vast body of case law in the modern era and will continue to do so in future. But the law on this point, even when seen in conjunction with the law relating to the traditional substantive grounds on which government action can be held unlawful, offers only a partial picture of the way in which administrative law fits into the broader constitutional principles of the rule of law and the sovereignty of Parliament.

14. Procedural Grounds of Judicial Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 374-404
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Partial Picture ◽  
The Law ◽  
Modern Era ◽  
Do So

This chapter examines the procedural grounds of judicial review. It discusses how the courts have used the procedural fairness doctrine by reviewing a number of leading cases to identify the values that appear to be shaping the content of the law. The analysis focuses primarily on case law drawn from the ‘modern’ (ie post-1960) era, but several seminal decisions from earlier periods are also considered. The concept of procedural fairness has generated a vast body of case law in the modern era and will continue to do so in future. But the law on this point, even when seen in conjunction with the law relating to the traditional substantive grounds on which government action can be held unlawful, offers only a partial picture of the way in which administrative law fits into the broader constitutional principles of the rule of law and the sovereignty of Parliament.

scholarly journals Le contrôle judiciaire des erreurs de droit en présence d'une clause privative

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-20
Author(s):  
Patrice Garant ◽  
Sylvio Normand
Keyword(s):  
New Brunswick ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Supreme Court

Administrative Tribunals have jurisdiction to deal with questions of law. In the exercise of such jurisdiction they may sometimes make mistakes in the construction of the statutes, regulations or other instruments. Even in the presence of a privative clause, an inferior tribunal should not be the supreme interpret of the law. It is one of the requirements of the « rule of law » that the Superior Court should have a supervisory « droit de regard ». Traditionally, only errors of law going to jurisdiction were out of the shield of the privative clause ; the Superior Courts used to restrain their intervention only after charactarizing the alleged error as « jurisdictional error of law ». Two difficulties came to arise from the approach about whether there exists an error of jurisdiction or one « merely » of law. Firstly, who can tell whether there is a genuine error of law. Secondly, what criteria transmute in the minds of Superior Court Judges an error into one of jurisdiction. The recent case law convinces us of the necessity of a different approach in order to achieve some clarity in this field of Administrative law. Mr. Justice Dickson of the Supreme Court of Canada hints at it in the Nispawin and the New Brunswick Liquor Corporation cases. This approach would put an end to the confusion that still prevail in other Supreme Court cases like Blanco or Labrecque. The distinction between errors of law going to jurisdiction and « merely » errors of law is unrational and so unpracticable that it should be abandoned and replaced by what we suggest in the following lines... Mr. Justice Robert Reid of the Ontario Divisional Court has also expressed the same concern in a remarquable judgment.

scholarly journals Principle of the Rule of Law in the Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights

1970 ◽  
pp. 373-379
Author(s):  
Tetiana Tsuvina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the interpretation of the principle of rule of law in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The concept of the rule of law, along with democracy and human rights makes up the three pillars of the Council of Europe and is endorsed in the Preamble to the ECHR. The Preamble to the ECHR states that the governments of European countries are like-minded and have a common heritage of political traditions, ideals, freedom and the rule of law. The rights most obviously connected to the rule of law include: the right of access to justice, the right to a fair trial, the legal principle that measures which impose a burden should not have retroactive effects the right to an effective remedy, anyone accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proved guilty etc. The author concludes that there is an expediency of grouping separate requirements of the rule of law in the practice of the ECtHR around concepts, which are concluded to be elements of the rule of law in a democratic society. Such elements of the rule of law in the practice of the ECHR are recognized as legality, legal certainty, fairness of a trial and the priority of human rights. Legality supposes that authorities need a legal basis for measures which interfere with a right of an individual, as well as quality requirement for the law such as accessibility, foreseeability and no arbitrariness. Legal certainty encompasses foreseeability in application of the law; non-retroactivity of legislation; the principle of res judicata; mandatory execution of court decisions and consistency of judicial practice. Fair trial requirements devoted into two groups: general requirements (access to court, independent and impartial tribunal, execution of court decisions etc.) and requirements for criminal proceedings (presumption of innocence, principle nullum crimen sine lege etc.) It is noted that the legality, legal certainty, fairness of a trial are formal requirements of the rule of law, thus the priority of human rights is a substantive (material) requirement of the rule of law. The aforementioned testifies to the natural-legal approach that the ECHR is guided by in interpreting the rule of law in its practice, understanding it primarily as the rule of human rights.

scholarly journals Questões controversas sobre a aplicação da “Lei Maria da Penha" no âmbito do Direito Penal

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (39) ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederico Gomes de Almeida Horta ◽  
Marina Ferreira de Melo Burrel ◽  
Matheus Pessoa de Faria
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Minas Gerais ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
The Rule Of Law

RESUMOO trabalho aponta e analisa questões controversas da Lei nº 11.340/2006, a partir do contexto no qual se consolidou. Por meio de pesquisas bibliográficas, análises doutrinárias e jurisprudenciais, pretende-se abordar os problemas percebidos na aplicação deste diploma no âmbito penal. Analisa-se, inclusive, um caso prático vivenciado na Divisão de Assistência Judiciária da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, demonstrando-se consequências da utilização de dispositivos da “Lei Maria da Penha” de maneira incoerente com a sistemática do processo penal constitucional do Estado Democrático de Direito. Esclarece o procedimento previsto na Lei e suas implicações penais e, a partir disso, questiona a imposição de restrições de liberdade ao suposto agressor no procedimento de medidas protetivas. Destaca, ainda, os problemas relacionados à prisão preventiva na Lei Maria da Penha, especialmente no que toca ao tempo de sua duração e à sua aplicabilidade em infrações puníveis com penas detenção ou mera prisão simples. Por fim, aborda a problemática da prisão preventiva com a finalidade de garantir o cumprimento de medidas protetivas.PALAVRAS-CHAVELei Maria da Penha. Direito Penal. Prisão Preventiva. Crime de desobediência. Contravenções Penais. Detenção. ABSTRACTThe paper points out and analyzes controversial issues of Act 11,340/2006, from the context of its consolidation. Through bibliographical research, doctrinal analysis and case law, it intendeds to address the problems perceived in the application of this Act in the criminal field. It also analyzes a lawsuit sponsored by the "Divisão de Assistência Judiciária" of the "Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais", demonstrating the consequences of the use of provisions of the "Maria da Penha Act" in a manner incoherent with the systematic of constitutional criminal proceedings created by the Rule of Law. It clarifies the procedure provided for in the Act and its criminal implications and, with this, questions the imposition of restrictions of freedom on the supposed aggressor in the procedure of protective measures. It also highlights the problems related to pre-trial detention in the Maria da Penha Law, especially with regard to the duration of the sentence and its applicability to offenses punishable by imprisonment or mere simple arrest. Finally, it addresses the problem of pre-trial detention in order to guarantee compliance with protective measures.KEYWORDS"Maria da Penha" Act. Criminal Law. Pre-trial detention. Contempt of court. Misdemeanor. Detention.

PRINCIPLES OF STATE REGULATION OF THE ACTIVITIES OF BODIES OF THE STATE EXECUTIVE SERVICE AND PRIVATE EXECUTORS

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (13) ◽  
pp. 69-77
Author(s):  
Mariіa Konstantinovna Kulava
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
State Regulation ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Regulatory Requirements ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
State Administration ◽  
Executive System ◽  
The Right

Within the presented article, taking into account already existing achievements of scientists, the concept, the main features of the principles of state administration of the executive system of Ukraine are defined. The principles of activity of executive bodies bodies according to the current legislation of Ukraine are determined. A brief description of the principles is presented, namely: the rule of law, legality, compulsory, independence, justice, impartiality and objectivity, discretion, transparency and openness of executive proceedings and its fixation by technical means, the reasonableness of the time limits for enforcement proceedings, the proportionality of enforcement measures and the amount of claims for decisions, the right to appeal decisions, actions or omissions of state executives, private performers. It is established that in general the principles of executive proceedings in the investigated normative acts are duplicated, in addition to the principles of independence and the right to appeal decisions, actions or inaction of state executives, private performers. The actual vision of the principles of public administration of the executive system of Ukraine is determined. The opinion on the need to supplement the list of principles with the following: the principle of equal competition between state and private performers through the balance between them; the principle of responsibility of the executive system bodies, their officials and private executors for damage caused as a result of violations of regulatory requirements; the principle of introducing effective incentives for voluntary implementation of decisions; the principle of professionalism and competence. Also, within the submitted article, it is stated that the use of the terms “principles” and “principles” in the Laws of Ukraine “On Bodies and Officials Performing Enforcement of Court Decisions and Decisions of Other Bodies”, “On Enforcement Proceedings”, which are adopted simultaneously and regulated, are unjustified, identical social relations.

Good Governance

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henk Addink
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
National Level ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Modern State ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
Further Development

The pivotal aim of this book is to explain the creation, development, and impact of good governance from a conceptual, principal perspective and in the context of national administrative law. Three lines of reasoning have been worked out: developing the concept of good governance; specification of this concept by developing principles of good governance; and implementation of these principles of good governance on the national level. In this phase of further development of good governance, it is important to have a clear concept of good governance, presented in this book as the third cornerstone of a modern state, alongside the concepts of the rule of law and democracy. That is a rather new national administrative law perspective which is influenced by regional and international legal developments; thus, we can speak about good governance as a multilevel concept. But the question is: how is this concept of good governance further developed? Six principles of good governance (which in a narrower sense also qualify as principles of good administration) have been further specified in a systematic way, from a legal perspective. These are the principles of properness, transparency, participation, effectiveness, accountability, and human rights. Furthermore, the link has been made with integrity standards. The important developments of each of these principles are described on the national level in Europe, but also in countries outside Europe (such as Australia, Canada, and South Africa). This book gives a systematic comparison of the implementation of the principles of good governance between countries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document