This book presents a comparison of the development of legitimate expectations and proportionality in European and English law against the different traditions of administrative law. While these two principles are well established in European law,only in recent years have the English courts years sought to integrate them into the common law and have experienced various difficulties in doing so. This book seeks to understand the motivation behind this development, explain why the English courts have been troubled by the principles and suggest how such difficulties can be resolved. It will be of interest to all administrative lawyers, both in practice and in academe. It will also be of interest to EU lawyers, particularly those interested in EU public law.
Presents a comparison of the development in European and English law of two legal principles, legitimate expectations and proportionality, against the different traditions of administrative law. Looks at case law of the English courts and the European Court of Justice, and explains why English courts have been troubled by legitimate expectations and proportionality and how such difficulties can be resolved. Suggests that problems associated with these principles are connected to different cultural approaches to the appropriate role of law in the modern state. Of interest to administrative lawyers. The author teaches law at the University of Manchester. Distributed by ISBS. c. Book News Inc.
This original and stimulating book is the first systematic study of the principle of `legitimate expectations' in administrative law to appear in the English language. The notion of reasonable or legitimate expectations has played a central role in the development of administrative law over the last thirty years and it remains one of the most contentious and most frequently invoked grounds of judicial review. In this book Dr Schonberg provides a detailed, comparative, and critical analysis of that notion He begins by clarifying why administrative law should protect expectations at all, by linking expectations to fairness, trust in administration, and the Rule of Law with its requirements of legal certainty and formal equality. In the light of this framework he examines in detail the principles and rules which contribute to the protection of expectations. The scope of this analysis is broad, looking both at procedural and substantive principles of administrative law as wellas principles of tort liability and stautory compensation. In all of these areas, English law is carefully compared with French and EC law and is shown how the three legal systems often reach similar outcomes by the application of different legal principles and rules. The current state of English law is examined critically in the light of the comparative study of French and EC law, and a number of original suggestions for legal reform are presented. They include the adoption of: a generalprinciple of irrevocability of intra vires administrative decisions, a distinct principle of substantive legitimate expectations subject to a `significant imbalance' threshold for judicial intervention, and a statutory right to compensation for loss caused by `sufficiently serious' violations of public law.
It is an unfortunate but unavoidable feature of even well-ordered democratic societies that governmental administrative agencies often create legitimate expectations (procedural or substantive) on the part of non-governmental agents (individual citizens, groups, businesses, organizations, institutions, and instrumentalities) but find themselves unable to fulfil those expectations for reasons of justice, the public interest, severe financial constraints, and sometimes harsh political realities. How governmental administrative agencies, operating on behalf of society, handle the creation and frustration of legitimate expectations implicates a whole host of values that we have reason to care about, including under non-ideal conditions-not least justice, fairness, autonomy, the rule of law, responsible uses of power, credible commitments, reliance interests, security of expectations, stability, democracy, parliamentary supremacy, and legitimate authority. This book develops a new theory of legitimate expectations for public administration drawing on normative arguments from political and legal theory. Brown begins by offering a new account of the legitimacy of legitimate expectations. He argues that it is the very responsibility of governmental administrative agencies for creating expectations that ought to ground legitimacy, as opposed to the justice or the legitimate authority of those agencies and expectations. He also clarifies some of the main ways in which agencies can be responsible for creating expectations. Moreover, he argues that governmental administrative agencies should be held liable for losses they directly cause by creating and then frustrating legitimate expectations on the part of non-governmental agents and, if liable, have an obligation to make adequate compensation payments in respect of those losses.
This article delves into the evolution and application of the doctrine of legitimate expectation in administrative law, exploring its fundamental principles and implications. The concept of legitimate expectation has emerged as a vital bridge between the Rule of Estoppel and the Principle of Administrative Fairness, serving to safeguard individuals against arbitrary exercise of power by state agencies. Further examines the theoretical underpinnings of legitimate expectation, its procedural and substantive aspects, and its significance in ensuring good governance. Through an analysis of key cases from different jurisdictions, including Sri Lanka, the article evaluates the development of the doctrine and its interplay with principles of natural justice and equality. The article also discusses the challenges and ambiguities faced in distinguishing between procedural and substantive legitimate expectations. Overall, it highlights the importance of maintaining a delicate balance between protecting legitimate expectations and prioritizing the public interest, while emphasizing the evolving nature of this doctrine within the realm of administrative law.
The recognition and enforcement of legitimate expectations by courts has been a striking feature of English law since R v North and East Devon Health Authority; ex parte Coughlan [2001] 3 QB 213. Although the substantive form of legitimate expectation adopted in Coughlan was quickly accepted by English courts and received a generally favourable response from public law scholars, the doctrine of that case has largely been rejected in other common law jurisdictions. The central principles of Coughlan have been rejected by courts in common law jurisdictions outside the UK for a range of reasons, such as incompatibility with local constitutional doctrine, or because they mark an undesirable drift towards merits review. The sceptical and critical reception to Coughlan outside England is a striking contrast to the reception the case received within the UK. This book provides a detailed scholarly analysis of these issues and considers the doctrine of legitimate expectations both in England and elsewhere in the common law world.
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.
Commonwealth Caribbean Administrative Law comprehensively explores the nature and function of administrative law in contemporary Caribbean society. The text considers the administrative machinery of Caribbean States, Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary, and examines the basis for judicial review of executive and administrative action in the Caribbean. The book will also examine how the courts on the Commonwealth Cariibeen have sought to define principles of administrative law.
The seventh edition of Textbook on Administrative Law continues to provide students with an accessible and stimulating guide to the subject. Practical in approach, the authors concentrate on fully analysing core topics, while at the same time setting them within a contextual and thematic framework.
The third edition of EU Administrative Law provides comprehensive coverage of the administrative system in the EU and the principles of judicial review that apply in this area. This revised edition provides important updates on each area covered, including new case law; institutional developments; and EU legislation. These changes are located within the framework of broader developments in the EU. The chapters in the first half of the book deal with all the principal variants of the EU administrative regime. Thus there are chapters dealing with the history and taxonomy of the EU administrative regime; direct administration; shared administration; comitology; agencies; social partners; and the open method of coordination. The coverage throughout focuses on the legal regime that governs the particular form of administration and broader issues of accountability, drawing on literature from political science as well as law. The focus in the second part of the book shifts to judicial review. There are detailed chapters covering all principles of judicial review and the discussion of the law throughout is analytical and contextual. It begins with the principles that have informed the development of EU judicial review. This is followed by a chapter dealing with the judicial system and the way in which reform could impact on the subject matter of the book. There are then chapters dealing with competence; access; transparency; process; law, fact and discretion; rights; equality; legitimate expectations; two chapters on proportionality; the precautionary principle; two chapters on remedies; and the Ombudsman.
