Legitimate Expectations and Prisoners' Rights: The Right to Get What You are Given

1997 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 727-733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Foster
Keyword(s):  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
The Right

14. The grounds for judicial review

2020 ◽  
pp. 309-353
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Fiduciary Duty ◽  
Bad Faith ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
Fair Hearing ◽  
The Right

This chapter considers the grounds on which public decisions may be challenged before the courts. It begins with an overview of two cases—Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corpn (1948) and Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (1985). The importance of these two cases is their distillation of the general principles. The discussion then covers the different grounds for judicial review: illegality, relevant/irrelevant considerations, fiduciary duty, fettering of a discretion, improper purpose, bad faith, irrationality, proportionality, procedural impropriety, natural justice, legitimate expectations, the right to a fair hearing, reasons, and the rule against bias. It is noted that principles often overlap, so that a challenge to a public law decision may be based on different principles.

scholarly journals Pushing the Boundaries: A Tentative Taxonomy of Money in New Zealand Private Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 607-622
Author(s):  
Matteo Solinas
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Technological Changes ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Legal Tender ◽  
Banking Institutions ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
The Right ◽  
Bank Money

This article seeks to define the boundaries of money in the context of proprietary taxonomy in New Zealand. It suggests that the traditional legal concept of money exclusively based on state issued (fiat) currency is dated, as does not accommodate the near-universal use of bank money in commercial transactions, nor the recent technological changes introduced by virtual currencies. As long as something functions as a means of payment and the holder has the right to exchange it for legal tender, the divide between mutually agreed payment obligations into those made on the base of fiat currencies and those not, becomes artificial. In providing responses to similar commercial arrangements and parties' legitimate expectations, not only coins and banknotes, but also balances held by customers in banking institutions, foreign money, and digital currencies, should qualify as money for private law purposes.

scholarly journals El principio de confianza legítima en el derecho a la vivienda: una asignatura pendiente de la doctrina constitucional

2018 ◽  
pp. 333-376
Author(s):  
María Begoña CRESPO HIDALGO
Keyword(s):  
Rental Housing ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Social Significance ◽  
Social State ◽  
The Social ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
The Right ◽  
Rental Housing Market

LABURPENA: Etxebizitzak alokatzeko merkatua malgutzeko eta sustatzeko neurriei buruzko ekainaren 4ko 4/2013 Legearen bigarren xedapen gehigarriari buruz, urriaren 22ko 216/2015 KAE, maiatzaren 10eko 51/2018 KAE, eta maiatzaren 24ko 56/2018 KAE eman dira. Lehenengoa a) apartatuari buruzkoa da, zeinaren bitartez zehazten den ez direla berritu behar Etxebizitzako estatu mailako planetan emandako laguntzak eta diru-laguntzak, eta beste biak, b) apartatuari buruzkoak, zeinaren bitartez bi baldintza ezartzen diren babestutako etxebizitza bat eskuratzeko sarrerarako estatuko zuzeneko laguntzak jasotzeko eskubidea izateko. Epai horiek kontuan hartuta, lan honetan konfiantza legitimoaren printzipioaren urraketak duen garrantzi soziala aztertu da, etxebizitza duin eta egoki bat izateko eskubidean proiektatzen denean hain zuzen. Erabaki konstituzionalak, jurisprudentzialak eta doktrinalak aztertu dira estatu sozial batean konfiantza legitimoa bermatzeko segurtasun juridikoari eta legegileek duten mugei dagokionez, baita arauen aurreikusgarritasunari eta aurretik doktrina jurisdikzionala ez egotearen ondoriozko segurtasun juridiko ezari dagokionez. RESUMEN: A raíz de las SSTC 216/2015, de 22 de octubre, 51/2018, de 10 de mayo y 56/2018, de 24 de mayo, sobre la disposición adicional segunda de la Ley 4/2013, de 4 de junio, de Medidas de Flexibilización y Fomento del Mercado del Alquiler de Viviendas, la primera de ellas respecto al apartado a) que determina no renovar las ayudas y subvenciones concedidas en el marco de los Planes Estatales de Vivienda, y las otras dos, sobre el apartado b) que establece dos requisitos para obtener el derecho al abono de las ayudas estatales directas a la entrada para la adquisición de una vivienda protegida, en este trabajo se analiza la transcendencia social de la vulneración del principio de confianza legítima cuando se proyecta sobre un derecho como es el derecho a una vivienda digna y adecuada. Se estudian una serie de pronunciamientos constitucionales, jurisprudenciales y doctrinales en relación con la seguridad jurídica y los límites del legislador para garantizar la confianza legítima en un estado social, así como la previsibilidad de las normas y la inseguridad jurídica derivada de la no existencia de una doctrina jurisdiccional al respecto. ABSTRACT: As a result of judgments 216/2015 of October 22, 51/2018 of May 10 and 56/2018 of May 24 on the second additional provision to Act 4/2013 of June 4 on measures aimed at the flexibilization and promotion of the rental housing market, the first one regarding section a) that determines not to renew aids and subsidies awarded in the framework of the National Government Housing plans and the others regarding section b) that establishes two requirements in order to gain the right to be awarded with state direct aids for the deposit to buy a government-sponsored housing, we analyze the social significance of the infringement of the principle of legitimate expectations when a right such as the right to a decent and appropriate home is impaired. Some series of constitutional, court and doctrine declarations are studied in connection with legal certainty and the limits of the legislator to guarantee legitimate expectations in a Social state, together with the predictability of the rules and the legal insecurity that derivesfrom the lack of a case law doctrine in respect thereof.

Proceedings before the Office and Procedural Rules

2021 ◽  
pp. 59-112
Author(s):  
Gert Würtenberger ◽  
Paul van der Kooij ◽  
Bart Kiewiet ◽  
Martin Ekvad
Keyword(s):  
Specific Procedure ◽  
Compulsory Licence ◽  
Community System ◽  
Plant Variety ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
Fair Hearing ◽  
The Right ◽  
Access To Documents

This chapter discusses the Basic Regulation and the Proceedings Regulation that contain a diversity of provisions on procedures, which relate to application procedures, objection procedures, or appeal procedures. It describes the Community plant variety rights system that opens the possibility for breeders to apply for Community plant variety rights. It also explains the specific procedure of framework of the Community system, which complies with fundamental principles on legitimate expectations and the right to a fair hearing. This chapter deals with the ancillary procedures relating to variety denominations, the objection procedure, and the procedure on access to documents. It highlights specific procedures to be followed concerning the application for a compulsory licence and requests for nullity and cancellation.

14. The grounds for judicial review

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Fiduciary Duty ◽  
Bad Faith ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
Fair Hearing ◽  
The Right

This chapter considers the grounds on which public decisions may be challenged before the courts. It begins with an overview of two cases—Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corpn (1948) and Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (1985). The importance of these two cases is their distillation of the general principles. The discussion then covers the different grounds for judicial review: illegality, relevant/irrelevant considerations, fiduciary duty, fettering of a discretion, improper purpose, bad faith, irrationality, proportionality, procedural impropriety, natural justice, legitimate expectations, the right to a fair hearing, reasons, and the rule against bias. It is noted that principles often overlap, so that a challenge to a public law decision may be based on different principles.

scholarly journals Die kerkregtelike toepassing van die reëls van 'natuurlike geregtigheid’ op grond van die Skrif

1995 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
C. J. Smit
Keyword(s):  
Legal Systems ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
Church Polity ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
The Right

Church polity is not the exercising of justice apart from justice in general, but merely the application of justice in another sphere using other procedures. Therefore the principles of fundamental justice, which underlie by far most legal systems, also apply to church polity. The principles of fundamental justice, which are unfolded in the rules of natural justice, are also found in Scripture. These principles include the following aspects: the right to be heard; the meeting of legitimate expectations; the provision of the reasons for the judgements; and the fact that no one may judge his own case.

scholarly journals Legitimate Expectations as an Object of Corporate Legal Relations

2020 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 50-62
Author(s):  
С. О. Сліпченко ◽  
Ю. М. Жорнокуй
Keyword(s):  
General Meeting ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Share Capital ◽  
Corporate Rights ◽  
Capital Share ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
The Right ◽  
To Receive

The authors have conducted the analysis of the legislation of Ukraine, the case law of Ukraine and the European Court of Human Rights, as well as doctrinal approaches to understanding legitimate expectations as objects of corporate legal relations. It has been concluded that the share (capital share), and in fact participation in the company, is an asset associated with the occurrence of favorable property consequences in the future, and has all the characteristics of legitimate expectations. Participation in a company has all the characteristics necessary for its potential monetary evaluation, because it is negative from its owner (does not have a personal, inseparable connection with the person to whom it belongs), and therefore is potentially viable. Monetary evaluation of the participation in the company allows us to classify this object as property benefits (asset). The emergence of economic benefits, as a result of the use of participation, the exercise of the right to it, indicates the connection of such benefits with the consequences that arise. Thus, participation in the company has all the characteristics of legitimate expectations. That is, the participant expects in the future to receive economic benefits from the participation in the company (exercise of corporate rights) that result from the placement of certain values in the charter capital, which have a monetary value. Legitimate expectations, in addition to regulatory corporate legal relations, can be recognized as the object of protective corporate relations, based on the facts of the violation of the right to peaceful possession of such property. It is applied both to the violation of the right to manage the corporation (in case of failure to notify about the general meeting of participants) and the refusal to repurchase shares from a shareholder as the exercise of the “right to disagree”. It is alleged that there are also protective legal relations with such an object as legitimate expectations in case of the violation of the rights to dividends, to the payment of the value of the share (capital share), to the liquidation quota. But such legal relations are not corporate, because the rights to be protected are not included into the group of corporate rights.

scholarly journals Multilingualism, Divergent Authentic Versions of a Legal Rule and Legitimate Expectations Of Individuals

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafał Mańko
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Rule ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Official Language ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The paper argues that the multilingualism of the EU legal order should be viewed from the point of view of the right of individuals to acquaint themselves with the their rights and duties under EU law in the official language of their Member State. In case of discrepancies of equally authentic versions, individuals should have the possibility to rely on an ‘authentic version’ defence, especially in tax, customs and criminal law relationships.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement under NAFTA Chapter 11: The Shape of Things to Come?

1998 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 263-290
Author(s):  
J. Anthony VanDuzer
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
The North ◽  
State Behaviour ◽  
Nafta Chapter 11 ◽  
To Come ◽  
The Right

SummaryRecently, there has been a proliferation of international agreements imposing minimum standards on states in respect of their treatment of foreign investors and allowing investors to initiate dispute settlement proceedings where a state violates these standards. Of greatest significance to Canada is Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement, which provides both standards for state behaviour and the right to initiate binding arbitration. Since 1996, four cases have been brought under Chapter 11. This note describes the Chapter 11 process and suggests some of the issues that may arise as it is increasingly resorted to by investors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document