Citizenship and Autonomy

This chapter argues that an adult’s right to citizenship follows from her right to securely pursue her good in the liberal state where she already has a moral right to live permanently. It defends the claim that when people migrate on a permanent basis to a liberal state in adulthood, they develop the legitimate expectation that they are allowed to pursue core projects and relationships that are territorially located and that extend across time. It also defends the claim that when adults start pursuing core projects and relationships, they acquire an autonomy-based moral claim to pursue them reliably into the future, as well as to engage in political actions that bear on how such projects and relationships can be pursued in the future.

John Paul II – the Pope of Holiness

Among many titles, John Paul II fully deserves to be called the “Pope of Holiness” due to a record number of beatifications and canonizations that he made and an original doctrine on holiness. He wanted to put into practice the conciliar teaching on the universal call of Christians to holiness. In the Pope’s theology of holiness, the emphasis is placed on the Holy Trinity as the source of all holiness. In addition, he speaks of the manifestations, models and means leading to holiness, and thus of a specific “pedagogy of holiness”. John Paul II’s doctrine of holiness is closely related to his lifestyle, which was confirmed by the Church with his beatification (1 May 2011) and canonization (27 April 2014). Considering his doctrine, life and concern for the Christian shape of Europe, it is a legitimate expectation that he will soon be proclaimed a Doctor of the Church and Patron of Europe.

Could banning virtual assets be a breach of the doctrine of legitimate expectation?

Purpose This paper aims to examine the validity of a state’s prohibition on virtual assets in the context of its global commitment to battle against money laundering. Design/methodology/approach This was empirical legal research exploring how a general lack of expertise to apply a risk-based approach in anti-money laundering strategies might have implications for invoking the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) exclusion provisions in virtual asset regulation. Findings Invoking the exclusion provisions for banning virtual assets without meeting the prerequisites may put the financial system at risk and make a jurisdiction’s legal obligations appear breached. Research limitations/implications Anti-money laundering (AML) policymakers will take precautions and avoid misuse of the liberties they enjoy under FATF exclusion clauses/provisions. Practical implications The results of this study will help ensure more informed decision-making on the legal status and regulation of virtual assets. Originality/value The study helps ascertain the limits of privileges accorded to states under FATF exclusion provisions in applying global standards against money laundering.

18. Procedural Impropriety

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. A public authority must have the legal power to act; if that power is conferred by statute, it may also specify the procedure that must be used prior to an action or a decision being taken. This is what is known as a ‘statutory procedure’ because it is specified in a statute. The statute may, for example, require the authority to give notice of its intention to take action in a certain way, to consult interested groups, or to tell individuals that they have the right to appeal from an adverse decision. If the authority does not comply, then this is a breach of the statutory procedure and may be reviewed as a procedural impropriety. This chapter discusses the judicial review of procedural impropriety. It covers the rules of natural justice; the right to be heard; legitimate expectation; the detailed requirements of natural justice; the rule against bias; and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Legitimate Expectation

Chapters 2 to 7 laid out the argument that contemporary administrative law can be understood in terms of administrative law values. This chapter is less concerned with interpreting the decided cases than with prescribing how judges ought to deal with potential conflict between the values. The chapter’s extended case study of legitimate expectation allows the demonstration of how the values might guide the resolution of difficult administrative law questions. A pluralist account of legitimate expectation is set out, building on the values present in the decided cases. The chapter begins by explaining how the values of individual self-realisation, good administration, electoral legitimacy and decisional autonomy manifest themselves in the decided cases. It then proceeds to outline how the values should be reconciled so as to guide the resolution of difficult questions, focusing on the contentious areas of knowledge and reliance, substantive legitimate expectations and enforcement of ultra vires legitimate expectations.

13. Grounds for judicial reviewProcedural impropriety, natural justice, and legitimate expectation

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the grounds for judicial review. These include procedural impropriety, which means breach of the rules of natural justice, and failure to comply with statutory procedural requirements. This chapter looks at the definitional elements of the rules of natural justice, whether the rules of natural justice apply in principle, the extent to which the rules of natural justice apply, disciplinary hearings, licensing cases, pecuniary and personal bias, whether or not a fair trial has taken place, and the right to be given reasons for a decision. This chapter also considers legitimate expectation as a ground for judicial review.

Policy and ‘Soft Law’ Rationales for Addressing Social and Environmental Concerns in Trade and Investment Treaties

This chapter addresses and discusses the international policy and soft law rationales that exist for states to include sustainable development concerns in their trade and investment treaties. First, it discusses reasons why the negative impacts of trade liberalization should not just be left to roll downhill onto the fragile ecosystems and vulnerable populations of developing states, using indications from the 1972 Conference on Human Environment (UNCHE), the 1992 Rio Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), the UN Commission for Sustainable Development (CSD) deliberations, the 1997 General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS), the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) and the 2012 Conference on Sustainable Development (UN CSD) to support this argument, and it specifically analyses the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as they frame the new consensus. It then goes on to discuss how these soft laws, while not legally binding, constitute a legitimate expectation that States will promote sustainable development in their trade and investment treaties. It finds that there is a convincing international policy rationale for States to undertake measures to prevent, or at least mitigate, the environment and social development impacts of trade and investment agreements, addressing the main tensions identified in this volume.