Judicial Review’s Exclusion by Privative Clauses: Dead or Just Resting?
Loading...
Date
Authors
Weeks, Greg
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Australian Lawyers Alliance
Abstract
The privative clause is dead – or so we are told. Nonetheless, it remains a topic of conversation and judicial attention in both Australia and England, albeit for somewhat different reasons. The Australian approach to privative clauses is substantially coloured by the relevance attached to the concept of jurisdictional error and is therefore distinctly constitutional in its outlook. The English courts have long ago dismissed the role of jurisdictional error and, although they continue to rely on the precedent of Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147, do so while rejecting the reasoning which informs the use of that case in Australia. This article considers the approaches taken in both jurisdictions and attempts to set out the continuing relevance of the privative clause in Australia.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Collections
Source
ANU College of Law Research Paper : Precedent
Type
Book Title
Entity type
Access Statement
Free Access via publisher website
License Rights
Restricted until
2099-12-31
Downloads
File
Description