Week 5 Lecture Notes

Preview (7 of 22 Pages)

100%

Week 5 Lecture Notes - Page 1 preview image

Loading page ...

L e c t u r e N o t e sOrigin: of Judicial Review■J u d i c i a l review has its o r i g i n s in c o m m o n law, in particular the rules of the Kings BenchCourts in L o n d o n .■J u d i c i a l review is only concerned with theegal ity of d e c i s i o n m a k i n g .»The three central writs that d e v e l o p e d in the Kings Bench — Preroqairve iVr.ts(duetotheirassociation with delivering the authority of the Monarch and disciplining lower-leveldecision-making -d e v e l o p e d g r a d u a l l y over the 13th to the18th century:Certiorari — to be fully i n f o r m e d ; to ca I Up the record of a lower- evel d e c i s i o n - m a k e rfor r e v i e w ; to quash a d e c i s i o n that has a l r e a d y beenm a d e3roni b i t i o n -al o w s f o ' highevel courts to p r o h i b i to-p r e v e n t a o ecis i o n - m a t e ' fromp r o c e e d i n g'witha c o u r s e of actionMendamUs -a I o ws f o r ehighe r co urt to co mpe I a d ecisi o r -maker to p erform certa ina c t i o n s*The law of E q u i t y also d e v e l o p e d some r e m e d i e s when the Prerogative Writs c o L i d r o tbeaccessed:DeclarationI n j u n c t i o n■The Prerogative Writs end E q u i t y r e m e d i e s are discussed t o g e t h e r as c o m m o n law review.Development of Judicial Review*Prob em s with the prer og at' ve writs and e q uitabl e rem edies:The prerogative writs in p a r t i c u l a r were very t e c h n i c a l and there were issueswithattempting to apply c o n c e p t s that were d e v e l o p e d c e n t u r i e s earlier to the m o d e r nadministrative states.A p p l i c a n t s had to go t h r o u g h a two-step h e a r i n g p r o c e s swhichwas very e x p e n s i v eand t i m e - c o r & U m i n g .There is a different in theevel of scope between the d i f f e r e n t p r e r o g a t i v e 'writs andd' Terent availability b e t w e e n the writs and e q u i t y which made t h i n g s very c o n f u s i n gfor p e o p l e .*Reform process — 1960s- 1970s- 1980s:

Week 5 Lecture Notes - Page 2 preview image

Loading page ...

1960s -a n u m b e r of House of Lords d e c i s i o n s r e m o v e d many of the technicalities inthe UK about theway j u d i c i a l review o p e r a t e dInAustralia there was the introduction of statutory revie w -Cth ADJRA 1 97 7PJRAQld1991ADJRA does not exclude c o m m o n law review. This m e a n s that r e v i e w t h r o u g h thestatutory m e c h a n i s m s of the ADJRA and the JRA sit in p a r a l l e l to c o m m o n law r e v i e w .*Therefore ADJRA ana c o m m o n law r e v i e w are p a r a l l e l ways tooring j u d i c i a l reviewapplications to court.*Since the ADJRA came into operation, there have been f u r t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t s and reformof the c o m m o n law by the HCA.Judicial Review in 4 Steps*Rega rd Iess of Usin q statutory or com monaw rev ew, j u d i c i a l revi ew invohras foU r step s:Access toJudicialReview•Are the d e c i s i o n and decision-m a k i n g b o d y reviewable?■Diffie re nt tests b etween ADJRA/JRA and com mon Ia w review.Access toJudicialReview ( S t a n d i n g )•Substa nt ive testing (same for ADJ RA/J RA a nd com mon Iaw).G r o u n d s of Review•Same tests for ADJRA/JRA and c o m m o n lew.R e m e d i e s•Same tests for ADJRA/JRA and c o m m o n law.Statutory Review*Cth - Fede reCourt or F e d e r a l Circuit Court (ADJRA &8).■Q l d- S u p r e m e Court (JRA s1 9).*The JRA is base d on theADJ RA with so me si g nifi cant d iffe re n ces.»SI 6 JRA (with Schedule 3) i m p l i e s that Cthe g i s l a t i o n and caseaw s h o u l d be Used ininterpreting similar sections of JRA.*Time l i m i t s for statutory review:28 days after reasons given (ADJRA si 1(3)f JRA s26(2}).ADJRA/JRA a low leave of court to b r i n gan a p p l i c a t i o n o u t s i d e of 28 days.*Leave of c o u r t d e p e n d s on:Subject matter and statutory contextEffects of a e ay in b r i n g i n g a p p l i c a t i o n

Week 5 Lecture Notes - Page 3 preview image

Loading page ...

The a p p l i c a n t has provided an 'acceptable e x p l a n a t i o n of the d e l a y ' and it is 'fair ande q u i t a b e in the circumstances' to extent the time (HunterValleyDevelopmentsPtyLtdv Minister for H o m e Affairs and Environment( 1 9 8 3 ) 58 ALR 335)*Access to j J d i ci aI review vi a statutory revi ew d epe nd s on sad slyin g fDJ r e le me nts (ADJ RA3s3(1) + 5 ; J R A ss4 + 20):Express exclusionsD e c i s i o nA d m i n i s t r a t i v e characterU n d e ran e n a c t m e n tExpress Exclusions (Decisions that cannot be reviewed)Com m o nwealth ADJ RA»D e c i s i o n s of the G o v e r n o r - G e n e r a— s3(1ts3(1 Rd) + S c h e d u l e 1:D e c i s i o n s Under industrial r e l a t i o n s laws -Sch 1(a)D e c i s i o n s Under ASi'O A c t -Sch 1(d)Privative clause decisions Under Migration Act s474(2) - S c h1(da)Step along the way'd e c i s i o n s for d e t e r m i n i n g t a x a t i o n -Sch 1(e)D e c i s i o n s Under the DefenceForce DisciplineAct -Sch 1(o)D e c i s i o n s Under Commonwealth E'ecto.rai1Act s25(1) or Part IIIA — Sch 1(q)Q u e e n s l a n d JRA.>Section 18 + Schedule 1 - eg:-Parti, Casino Confrot Act 1982,ss28(3), 31(23) +32(7)•Part 1,District Court of Queensland Act 1967,s28•Part 1,Industrial Relations Act 2016,ss554(3), 557(3),765•Part 2, Vkftness Protection Act2000•Part 2,Police Service AdministrationAct 1990, part 5A>NOTE: JRA has no equivalent of ADJRA s3(1)(c). Thismeans decisions of Governor ARE reviewable underJRA.

Week 5 Lecture Notes - Page 4 preview image

Loading page ...

Privative Clauses■A privative or "oUsfer" clause is a legislative provision that seeks to protect p a r t i c u l a radministrative actions f r o m j u d i c i a l r e v i e w .*h is a direct statement in l e g i s l a t i o n d e d a r i n g that actions or decisions of an executiveagency are N O T neviewab e.*The courts have adopted the p r i n c i p e that a right of r e c o u r s e to the courts to ensure theegality of administrative action is an i m p o r t a n t c o m m o n law p r i n c i p l e , which can only bed i s p l a c e d with d e a r words.»As a c o n s e q u e n c e , privative da Uses are read very strictly.An example:Workplace Relations Act 1996(Cth)$574 Awards of Commission are finalAn award,.,,(a) is final and conclusive; and(b) must not be challenged, appealed against, reviewed,quashed or called in question in any court; and(c) is not subject to prohibition, mandamus or injunctionin any court on any account*Why do Iegi slatUres e nact p rivative claU ses?They provide certainty for decision-makers.Al low for timely de ci sion-m aking by t h o s e withsp eci aIisrt expe rti se.In areas w h e r e there are well-resoUrcec interests, such clauses p r e v e n t such partiesg e t t i n g an Unfair a d v a n t a g e by c o n t i n u o u s l y reviewing U n f a v o u r a b l e d e c i s i o n s ,*Why d o coU rts dislike privative cl aUses?Principles associated 'with the rule of law suggest that j u d i c i a l review is essential toensure th at th e govern me nt is acti ng lawfu 11y .Sep arati o n of p owe rs arg Ume nt about the i m p o rtance of an ind epe r d ent jUdi da ry ink e e p i n g a check on executive d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g .Decision (is there a reviewable decision?)*It is p o s s i b l e to b r i n g ara p p l i c a t i o n for a r e v i e w of 'decisions" Under s5 ADJRA and s20JRA.

Week 5 Lecture Notes - Page 5 preview image

Loading page ...

•h is possible to b r i n g an a p p l i c a t i o n for review of "conduct for the purpose of making adecision' Under so ADJRA and s21 JRA.■h's p o s s i b l e to bring an a p p l i c a t i o n for review of the failure to make a d e c i s i o n Under s7ADJRA and s22 JRA..Have to establish if the action by the cecis i o n - m a k e r is a reviewable d e c i s i o n .>' Decision' defined by ADJRA s3(2); JRA s5:In this Ad.a reference to the making of a decision indudes areference to.(a} making, suspending, revoking or refusing to make an order,award or determination;(b) giving, suspending, revoking or refusing to give a certificate,direction, approval, consent or permission;(c) issuing, suspending, revoking or refusing to issue a licence.authority or other instrument(d) imposing a condition or restriction:(e) making a declaration, demand or requirement;(I) retaining. or refusing to deliver up. an article; or(g) doing or refusing Io do any other act or thing:and a reference to a failure to makea decision shall beconstrued accordingly.■The key i ssLes to cons: d e r a t e :W h e n is there a decision c a p a b l e of b e i n g r e v i e w e d ?What is the status of p r e l i m i n a r y d e c i s i o n s that ere steps along theway?*Austrsi'i'a.n Broadcasting Tribune/vB o n d ( 1 9 9 0 ) 1 70 CLR 321 :The d e c i s i o n that B o n d was not fit and p r o p e r to hold a broadcastingice nee was notreviewable ( M a s o n CJ}.•AustratianBroadcastingTribunalvBond(cont):R e a s o n s :> 'The answer is that a reviewabledecision' is one for whichprovision is made by or under a statute. Thai will generally, butnot always, entail a decision which sfinal or operative anddeterminative ...> A conclusion readied as a step along the way ... leading to anultimate decision would not ordinarily amount to a reviewabledecision, unless the statute provided fix the making of a findingorrulingonthatpointso lhaithedecision,through anintermediate decision, might accurately bedescribedas adecision under an enactment.' per Mason CJ at 337

Week 5 Lecture Notes - Page 6 preview image

Loading page ...

*Therefore Bond is an authority that;D ecisi o n = in Act ( r e e d to be able to identify provi sion in the Act th at p rovide s f or th ed e c i s i o n that's b e i n g m a c e } .N e e dsection a u t h o r i s i n g the d e c i s i o n b e i n g reviewedP r e l i m i n a r y d e c i s i o n s not directly p r o v i d e d by in Act are NOT REVIEWABLEP r e l i m i n a r y d e c i s i o n s d i r e c t l y provided for in Act are reviewable.N eed to show th e exa ct se ction .*Another issue in B o n dwas w h e t h e r the p r e l i m i n a r y d e c i s i o n c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d to bec o n d u c t for the p u r p o s e of m a k i n g a d e c i s i o n (s6 ADJRA):C o n d u c t is essentially p r o c e d u r eand not s u b s t a n t i v e in character ( M a s o n CJ at 342)Therefore, p r e l i m i n a r y decisions are notg e n e r ay considered to constitute ' c o n d u c t ' .*E x a m p l e s of c o n d u c t !Taking e v i d e n c e and h o l d i n g an inqU iry (s3(5))D e c i s i o n s to refuse legal representation at a h e a r i n gAdministrative Character*The phrase ‘ a d m i n i s t r a t i v e poweri m p o s e s a separation of p o w e r s exclusion on t h o s ed e c i s i o n s which establish ru es, g u i d e l i n e s , or g e n e r a l s t a n d a r d s .*Minister for indust/y a n d Commerce v Tooheys ( 1982 i 60 FLR 325:Issue: h o w t od i s t i n g u i s h between administrative andeqislative d e c i s i o n s ? Was therefusal to make a by-law Under theCustoms Act administrative or legislative?O u t c o m e : A d m i n i s t r a t veR e a s o n : the distinction is essentially between the c r e a t i o n or formulation of new rulesof law h a v i n g g e n e r a l app i c a t i o n (i.e., legislative) and the application of t h o s e g e n e r aaws to particular cases (i.e., a d m i n i s t r a t i v e -B o w e n CJ, N o r t h r o p and L o c k h a r t JJ at665«Centra J’Q/d Lan d CouncilvAttorn ey-Gen era/ (Cih) (2002) 188 ALR 200Issue: where the Minister's d e c i s i o n s about w h e t h e r c e r t a i n activities were'approvedexp/o ration acts' Under the Native Trt/e Actegislative or administrative?O u t c o m e : LegislativeR e a s o n : W i l c o x J (at para 59) o u t l i n e d a n u m b e r of i n d i c a t o r s :•Decisions d e t e r m i n i n g the c o n t e n t of rules of g e n e r a(usually prospective)a p p l i c a t i o n (legislative) vs app i c a t i o n of rul es to p a r t i c u l a r cases (administrative).

Week 5 Lecture Notes - Page 7 preview image

Loading page ...

■Provi sion for m erits revi ew (ad mi ni strative)•Pari iam anta ry control of th e d ecisi o n (l eg i slative)•Req ui remerrt fo r pu blic con sUItation (leg sistive)•B i n d i n g legal effect, parti cU arly in effect on statutory p r o v i s i o n s (legislative)■SAT F MPty Ltd v Australian Broadcasting Authority[ 1 9 9 7 ] FCA 647 per S u n d b e r g J at 308a n o t h e r e x a m p e of d e t e r m i n i n g administrative c h a r a c t e r .Under Enactment•Enactment is defined in ADJ RA and J RA:ADRJA s-3(1) -enactment is an Act or i n s t r u m e n t (in d u d i n g rU es„ regU ations or by-aws) m a d e Under an ActJRA s3 -e n a c t m e n t is an Act or statutory i n s t r u m e n tJRA s9 —‘Under enactment' refers to exercise of power Under a 'non-statuto/ys c h e m e ' that is f u n d e d by an a p p r o p r i a t i o n by Parliament or from atax/levy.•A key issue is how p r o x i m a t e to an e n a c t m e n t must the decision be?•Australian National University v Burns(1 982) 64 FLR 166Issue: Burns went on a p e r i o d of e x t e n d e d sickeave and University d e c i d e d tot e r m i n a t e his e m p l o y m e n t . Was Burns' dismissal 'Under enactment ?O u t c o m e :No it wasn'tReasons:•S e c t i o n 23 AWW Act p r o v i d e d for appointments, not dismiss a•Clause 2 ( b X i i ) of e m p l o y m e n t c o n t r a c t referred to dismissal on m e d i c a l g r o u n d s•W h i l e e n t e r i n g into the contract was u n d e r e n a c t m e n t (s23), dismissal was madeUnder the contract of e m p l o y m e n t■Therefore, not a ecisi on was not Under the e n a c t m e n t and Burns co J Id not getreasons Under s13■GriffithUniversity v Tang(20 05) 2 13 ALR 724Issue: There was an attempt by Tang to c h a l l e n g e the d e c i s i o n m a d e by theUniversity's Assessment Board e x c l u d i n g her from further e n r o l m e n t from her PhDb e c a u s e of a f i n d i n g of a c a d e m i c misconduct. Was the d e c i s i o n by the AssessmentBoard made Under theGU Act?O u t c o m e :4/1 m a j o r i t y said NO

Preview Mode

This document has 22 pages. Sign in to access the full document!

Report

Study Now!

Document Details

Related Documents

Property Law Drill 1 Ownership, Property Types, an

Property Law Drill 4 Marital Property, Land Owners

Property Law Drill Ownership, Family Code, and Sta

Case Analysis of Soji and Parental Duty

Undue Influence in Contract Law Key Cases and Clas

Assessment 2 Job Hazard Analysis JHA

Assessment 1 Long Answer Question

Introduction to Law and Key Concepts and Principle

CIV 3702 Assignment 1

Final Project Milestone One Malpractice Case

Company

Explore

Study Tools