Around the common law world, the law of judicial review of administrative action has changed dramatically in recent decades, accelerating a centuries-long process of incremental evolution. This book offers a fresh framework for understanding the core features of contemporary administrative law. Through comparative analysis of case law from Australia, Canada, England, Ireland, and New Zealand, the author develops an interpretive approach by reference to four values: individual self-realisation, good administration, electoral legitimacy, and decisional autonomy. The interaction of this plurality of values explains the structure of the vast field of judicial review of administrative action: institutional structures, procedural fairness, substantive review, remedies, restrictions on remedies, and the scope of judicial review. Addressing this wide array of subjects in detail, the book demonstrates how a pluralist approach, with the values being employed in a complementary and balanced fashion, can enhance our understanding of administrative law. Furthermore, such an approach can guide the future development of the law of judicial review of administrative action, a point illustrated by a careful analysis of the unsettled doctrinal area of legitimate expectation. The book closes by arguing that the author's values-based, pluralist framework supports the legitimacy of contemporary administrative law which, although sometimes called into question, facilitates the flourishing of individuals, of public administration, and of the liberal democratic system.

A new framework for understanding contemporary administrative law, through a comparative analysis of case law from Australia, Canada, England, Ireland, and New Zealand. The author argues that the field is structured by four values: individual self-realisation, good administration, electoral legitimacy and decisional autonomy.

Administrative tribunals are a vital part of the public law frameworks of many countries. This is the 1st edited book collection to examine tribunals across the common law world. It brings together key international scholars to discuss current and future challenges. The book includes contributions from leading scholars from all major common law jurisdictions – the UK, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Israel, Hong Kong, Singapore, India and South Africa. This global analysis is both deep and expansive in its coverage of the operation of administrative tribunals across common law legal systems. The book has two key themes: one is the enduring question of the location and operation of tribunals within public law systems; the second is the continued mission of tribunals to provide administrative justice. The collection is an important addition to global public law scholarship, addressing common problems faced by the tribunals of common law countries, and providing solutions for how tribunals can evolve to match the changing nature of government.

Schwartz provides a masterly exposition of administrative law through a comparative study of the French droit administratif, arguably the most sophisticated Continental model. As Vanderbilt points out in his introduction, this is an important field that involves much more than administrative procedure. It deals directly with some of the most crucial issues of modern government regarding the distribution of power between governmental units, the resulting effect on the freedom of the individual and on the strength and stability of the state. Reprint of the sole edition. "[T]his book represents a significant achievement.... Unlike so many volumes that roll off the press these days, it fills a real need; and, though perhaps not the definitive work in English on the subject, it fills it extremely well." --Frederic S. Burin, Columbia Law Review 54 (1954) 1016 Bernard Schwartz [1923-1997] was professor of law and director of the Institute of Comparative Law, New York University. He was the author of over fifty books, including The Code Napoleon and the Common-Law World (1956), the five-volume Commentary on the Constitution of the United States (1963-68), Constitutional Law: A Textbook (2d ed., 1979), Administrative Law: A Casebook (4th ed., 1994) and A History of the Supreme Court (1993).

With the aim of expanding legal scholarly imagination, this Research Agenda takes a tripolar approach to administrative law. It opens the boundaries of administrative law scholarship to new subject areas, exemplifies and opens for consideration several different attitudes to research, and illustrates a multiplicity of different ways of writing about the subject.

This original book fills a significant gap in legal literature by providing an exploration of research methodologies in public law; a field of research in which research methods are becoming increasingly prominent and sophisticated. Featuring thoughtful chapters written by leading scholars in the field, this book provides a thorough explanation of the key features, characteristics, and challenges of distinct methodological approaches to public law research.

This book provides a detailed account of each law officer's functions and draws on that account as the basis for a conceptual analysis of their constitutional legitimacy. In recent years, the constitutional legitimacy of law officers has been questioned repeatedly because of recurring controversies surrounding the discharge of their varied functions. Indeed, it has become increasingly clear that those functions enable law officers to play a highly influential part in the regulation and exercise of public power throughout the United Kingdom. McCormick argues that the most persuasive framework for analysing the offices which make up this diverse regime involves concentrating on the constitutional values of independence, accountability and trust which underpin it. Both aspects of the book – namely the explanation of individual functions and the conceptual analysis of collective legitimacy – are written in a holistic way which encompasses critical analyses about the Attorney General and Solicitor General for England and Wales; the Counsel General for Wales; the Lord Advocate, Solicitor General and Advocate General for Scotland, as well as the Attorney General and Advocate General for Northern Ireland.

This book explores critical issues about how courts engage with questions of fact in public law adjudication. Although the topic of judicial review - the mechanism through which individuals can challenge governmental action - continues to generate sustained interest amongst constitutional and administrative lawyers, there has been little attention given to questions of fact. This is so despite such determinations of fact often being hugely important to the outcomes and impacts of public law adjudication. The book brings together scholars from across the common law world to identify and explore contested issues, common challenges, and gaps in understanding. The various chapters consider where facts arise in constitutional and administrative law proceedings, the role of the courts, and the types of evidence that might assist courts in determining legal issues that are underpinned by complex and contested social or policy questions. The book also considers whether the existing laws and practices surrounding evidence are sufficient, and how other disciplines might assist the courts. The book reconnects the key practical issues surrounding evidence and facts with the lively academic debate on judicial review in the common law world; it therefore contributes to an emerging area of scholarly debate and also has practical implications for the conduct of litigation and government policy-making.

In the field of administrative law, there is no systematic body of rules similar to those characteristic of European civil codes. General principles are therefore of fundamental importance. This volume - the sixth in the series concerning the common core of European administrative laws - explores this importance through two strands. Firstly, it examines in detail the relationship between general principles of law, such as due process, and sector-specific rules established by legislative and regulatory provisions, for example in licensing and disciplinary matters. Several questions about the nature of general principles emerge through this analysis. Are general principles about filling gaps? Or do they have a foundational role because they give meaning to the values that are shared by European legal systems, such as respect for the rule of law and for fundamental rights? Secondly, this volume also explores the interaction between commonality and diversity in European administrative law. It considers whether there are shared standards of administrative conduct, including the duty to give reasons, or if there are fundamental differences with regard to non-European legal systems, such as that of China and Venezuela. These questions are investigated through factual analysis, based on a set of hypothetical cases, which are discussed by national experts. This book then scrutinizes these questions to determine how commonality and diversity have extended and interact with one another, within and across legal systems, both diachronically and synchronically, over the course of a century. It shows that there are both unexpected areas of agreement between the European legal systems, notably concerning the right to be heard (expressed by the maxim audi alteram partem) and the duty to give reasons, and there are also areas of disagreement, for example as far as the right to remain silent vis ? vis the administration (that is, nemo tenetur se detegere) is concerned.

This book seeks to further our understanding of the nature of administrative law doctrine and adjudication. It has three main aims. The first is to improve understanding of administrative law's 'anatomy' by pulling the subject apart and exploring the nature of the legal structures at play in adjudication. In doing so, the book emphasises three main ways in which administrative law's anatomy is both complex and diverse, namely: - administrative law doctrine interacts with a broad array of legislative frameworks; - administrative law adjudication seeks to accommodate a variety of legal values; and, - administrative law is concerned with legal relationships of different kinds. The second aim is to illustrate the importance of recognising the complexity and variety of administrative law's anatomy in three particular doctrinal contexts: procedural review, legitimate expectations and standing. The third and final aim is to raise an important but under-explored question: is it plausible and useful to attempt to make sense of administrative law doctrine by reference to a singular organising concept or principle? The overarching message of the book is one of cynicism. The complexity and variety of administrative law's legal structures probably means that attempts to explain the field 'monistically', while they may capture important themes, will be unhelpfully reductionist. Ambitious and thought-provoking, this is an important new statement on administrative law.