Ivor Jennings’ Definition of Administrative Law
Ivor Jennings’ Definition of Administrative Law
Who was Ivor Jennings?
Ivor Jennings was a prominent British constitutional lawyer and academic whose works have significantly influenced the study of constitutional and administrative law, especially in the UK and Commonwealth countries.
Jennings’ Definition of Administrative Law
Ivor Jennings defined Administrative Law as:
“The law which regulates the exercise of public power.”
This means administrative law governs the actions, powers, and procedures of public authorities, including government departments, ministers, and administrative agencies. It is the body of law that ensures these bodies act within the law, do not abuse power, and respect individual rights.
Explanation of the Definition
Regulation of Public Power: Administrative law controls how public officials and bodies exercise power granted to them by statutes or common law.
Ensures Legality and Fairness: It provides checks and balances on administrative decisions to prevent arbitrariness, bias, and misuse of authority.
Scope: Covers rule-making, decision-making, enforcement, and adjudication by administrative bodies.
Remedies: Administrative law provides remedies such as judicial review to challenge unlawful administrative actions.
Key Principles in Administrative Law
Ultra Vires: Actions beyond the legal power granted are invalid.
Natural Justice/Fairness: Right to a fair hearing and impartial decision-making.
Reasonableness: Decisions must be rational and not arbitrary.
Proportionality: Actions must be proportionate to the aim pursued.
Judicial Review: Courts review administrative actions for legality.
Important Case Laws Illustrating Administrative Law Principles
1. Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation (1948)
Principle: Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Facts: The local authority imposed a condition on a cinema’s license forbidding children under 15 on Sundays.
Ruling: The court held that a decision would only be overturned if it was so unreasonable that no reasonable authority would ever have imposed it.
Importance: Established the “Wednesbury test” for reviewing administrative decisions — they must not be irrational or perverse.
2. Ridge v Baldwin (1964)
Principle: Natural Justice — Right to a Fair Hearing
Facts: Ridge, a police chief, was dismissed without a proper hearing.
Ruling: The House of Lords held the dismissal was unlawful because he was denied a fair hearing.
Importance: Reinforced the principle of audi alteram partem — the right to be heard before a decision affecting rights is made.
3. Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission (1969)
Principle: Jurisdictional Error and ouster clauses
Facts: Anisminic challenged a decision by the Commission which excluded the courts from reviewing decisions.
Ruling: The House of Lords ruled that errors of law by administrative bodies result in the decision being a nullity and are reviewable despite ouster clauses.
Importance: Strengthened judicial review by limiting the effect of ouster clauses.
4. Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (1985) — GCHQ Case
Principle: Judicial Review of Prerogative Powers
Facts: The government banned union membership at GCHQ citing national security without consultation.
Ruling: The House of Lords held prerogative powers are subject to judicial review but the decision was justified here.
Importance: Confirmed that executive decisions, even under royal prerogative, are subject to administrative law controls.
5. Padfield v Minister of Agriculture (1968)
Principle: Proper Purpose Doctrine
Facts: The Minister refused to refer a complaint to a committee even though statute required it.
Ruling: The court held that powers must be exercised for the purpose intended by Parliament.
Importance: Established that administrative powers cannot be used for improper or irrelevant purposes.
Summary of Key Administrative Law Principles from Cases
| Case | Principle | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Wednesbury | Reasonableness | Decisions must not be irrational or arbitrary |
| Ridge v Baldwin | Natural Justice (Fair Hearing) | Right to be heard before adverse decision |
| Anisminic | Jurisdictional Error & Judicial Review | Courts can review errors despite ouster clauses |
| GCHQ Case | Judicial Review of Prerogative Powers | Prerogative powers are reviewable |
| Padfield | Proper Purpose | Powers must be exercised for proper purposes |
Conclusion
Ivor Jennings’ definition captures the essence of administrative law as the legal framework regulating how public authorities wield their powers. Through landmark cases, courts have ensured administrative decisions are lawful, fair, and reasonable. These principles help maintain the rule of law and protect individuals from abuse of administrative power.
RELATED Blog
0 comments