Records, Reasons and Rationality in Judicial Control of Administrative Power: England, the US and Australia
Download (294.26 kB)
-
Altmetric Citations
Description
This article analyses, from historical and comparative perspectives, three closely related concepts of administrative law - namely records, reasons and rationality. It finds that the concept of the 'administrative record' is far more significant in United States administrative law than in either English or Australian administrative law, and suggests why this might be so. The importance of the record in US law explains why it imposes stronger obligations on administrators to give reasons than...[Show more]
dc.contributor.author | Cane, Peter | |
---|---|---|
dc.date.accessioned | 2015-12-07T22:45:46Z | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0021-2237 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1885/25519 | |
dc.description.abstract | This article analyses, from historical and comparative perspectives, three closely related concepts of administrative law - namely records, reasons and rationality. It finds that the concept of the 'administrative record' is far more significant in United States administrative law than in either English or Australian administrative law, and suggests why this might be so. The importance of the record in US law explains why it imposes stronger obligations on administrators to give reasons than does either English or Australian law. It also explains why terms such as 'rationality' and 'reasonableness' have significantly different meanings in US administrative law on the one hand, and English and Australian law on the other. | |
dc.publisher | Israel Law Review Association | |
dc.source | Israel Law Review | |
dc.title | Records, Reasons and Rationality in Judicial Control of Administrative Power: England, the US and Australia | |
dc.type | Journal article | |
local.description.notes | Imported from ARIES | |
local.identifier.citationvolume | 48 | |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | |
local.identifier.absfor | 180103 - Administrative Law | |
local.identifier.absfor | 180106 - Comparative Law | |
local.identifier.absfor | 180108 - Constitutional Law | |
local.identifier.ariespublication | u1015647xPUB39 | |
local.type.status | Published Version | |
local.contributor.affiliation | Cane, Peter, ANU College of Law, ANU | |
local.description.embargo | 2037-12-31 | |
local.bibliographicCitation.issue | 3 | |
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage | 309 | |
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage | 328 | |
local.identifier.doi | 10.1017/S002122371500014X | |
local.identifier.absseo | 940406 - Legal Processes | |
dc.date.updated | 2015-12-07T11:34:50Z | |
local.identifier.scopusID | 2-s2.0-84945117612 | |
Collections | ANU Research Publications |
Download
File | Description | Size | Format | Image |
---|---|---|---|---|
01_Cane_Records,_Reasons_and_2015.pdf | 294.26 kB | Adobe PDF |
Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
Updated: 17 November 2022/ Responsible Officer: University Librarian/ Page Contact: Library Systems & Web Coordinator