OECD and administrative law
OECD and Administrative Law: Overview
What is the OECD?
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is an international organization that promotes policies to improve the economic and social well-being of people worldwide. It offers guidelines and standards that influence administrative governance, transparency, accountability, and good regulatory practices in member countries.
OECD’s Role in Administrative Law
While the OECD itself does not make laws, it provides:
Standards and best practices on regulatory quality, administrative transparency, and anti-corruption.
Guidelines on public governance that member states use to reform and improve their administrative systems.
Influence on judicial review principles like transparency, fairness, and legality.
Tools to improve public sector integrity and reduce arbitrary or corrupt administrative decisions.
Key Administrative Law Cases Influenced by OECD Principles
Here are four or five important cases that highlight administrative law concepts aligned with OECD principles such as transparency, legality, and fairness:
1. Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (The GCHQ Case) [1985]
Facts:
The government banned trade union membership at the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) citing national security, without consulting unions.
Issue:
Could the decision be challenged through judicial review for failure to consult?
Judgment:
The court held that prerogative powers are subject to judicial review, but national security was a relevant factor limiting procedural fairness. The decision was lawful.
Relevance to OECD:
This case reflects the OECD’s principles of balancing transparency and confidentiality in public administration. It shows the limits of administrative openness when national security is involved.
2. R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017]
Facts:
The government imposed fees for bringing cases to employment tribunals.
Issue:
Were the fees lawful and did they restrict access to justice?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held the fees unlawful because they prevented access to justice, violating principles of fairness and equality.
Relevance to OECD:
The case aligns with OECD guidelines promoting fair access to justice and non-discrimination in administrative procedures.
3. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody [1994]
Facts:
Prisoners were not given reasons for their sentence tariff decisions.
Issue:
Did the failure to give reasons violate principles of fairness?
Judgment:
The court ruled that fairness usually requires reasons to be given so affected persons can understand and challenge decisions.
Relevance to OECD:
This reflects OECD principles of transparency and accountability in administrative decision-making.
4. Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1968]
Facts:
The Minister refused to refer complaints to a committee, allegedly for improper reasons.
Issue:
Did the Minister unlawfully frustrate the purpose of the statute?
Judgment:
The House of Lords held the Minister acted illegally by refusing to exercise discretion in a way that frustrated the statute's purpose.
Relevance to OECD:
OECD encourages proper exercise of discretionary powers aligned with legislative intent and public interest, as reinforced in this case.
5. Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969]
Facts:
A commission made an error of law and tried to claim its decisions were not reviewable.
Issue:
Could courts review decisions affected by errors of law despite statutory ouster clauses?
Judgment:
The House of Lords held errors of law rendered decisions null and void, so they were reviewable.
Relevance to OECD:
This case upholds legal accountability and judicial oversight, core OECD values for administrative law.
Summary
The OECD promotes principles of transparency, fairness, legality, and accountability in administrative governance.
Courts apply these principles through judicial review, ensuring administrative decisions comply with law and procedural fairness.
Cases like Anisminic, Padfield, and Doody embody these principles in practice.
The balance between openness and legitimate confidentiality (as in the GCHQ case) is also a key concern in OECD guidelines.
RELATED Blog
0 comments