|
Showing 1 - 4 of
4 matches in All Departments
This book considers the phenomenon of soft law employed by domestic
public authorities. Lawyers have long understood that public
authorities are able to issue certain communications in a way that
causes them to be treated like law, even though these are neither
legislation nor subordinate legislation. Importantly for soft law
as a regulatory tool, people tend to treat soft law as binding even
though public authorities know that it is not. It follows that soft
law's 'binding' effects do not apply equally between the public
authority and those to whom it is directed. Consequently, soft law
is both highly effective as a means of regulation, and inherently
risky for those who are regulated by it. Rather than considering
soft law as a form of regulation, this book examines the possible
remedies when a public authority breaches its own soft law upon
which people have relied, thereby suffering loss. It considers
judicial review remedies, modes of compensation which are not based
upon a finding of invalidity, namely tort and equity, and 'soft'
challenges outside the scope of the courts, such as through the
Ombudsman or by seeking an ex gratia payment.
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.
This book considers the phenomenon of soft law employed by domestic
public authorities. Lawyers have long understood that public
authorities are able to issue certain communications in a way that
causes them to be treated like law, even though these are neither
legislation nor subordinate legislation. Importantly for soft law
as a regulatory tool, people tend to treat soft law as binding even
though public authorities know that it is not. It follows that soft
law's 'binding' effects do not apply equally between the public
authority and those to whom it is directed. Consequently, soft law
is both highly effective as a means of regulation, and inherently
risky for those who are regulated by it. Rather than considering
soft law as a form of regulation, this book examines the possible
remedies when a public authority breaches its own soft law upon
which people have relied, thereby suffering loss. It considers
judicial review remedies, modes of compensation which are not based
upon a finding of invalidity, namely tort and equity, and 'soft'
challenges outside the scope of the courts, such as through the
Ombudsman or by seeking an ex gratia payment.
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.
|
You may like...
Onderwereld
Fanie Viljoen
Paperback
R242
R199
Discovery Miles 1 990
|