Victorian Parliament’s role in administrative law
🏛️ Victorian Parliament’s Role in Administrative Law
📌 1. What is Administrative Law?
Administrative law governs the actions, decisions, and powers of public authorities, ensuring they act lawfully, fairly, and reasonably.
In the Victorian context, administrative law operates under both:
Statutory framework (created by Parliament), and
Common law principles (developed by courts).
📌 2. Victorian Parliament’s Key Functions in Administrative Law
The Parliament of Victoria plays a central role in shaping administrative law through the following:
A. Creating Administrative Tribunals and Agencies
Parliament enacts legislation that establishes:
Administrative decision-making bodies (e.g., Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal – VCAT),
Regulatory agencies (e.g., WorkSafe Victoria, EPA Victoria).
Example:
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic) – created VCAT as the central body for resolving administrative disputes.
B. Delegating Powers via Enabling Acts
Parliament passes enabling legislation that delegates specific administrative powers to:
Ministers,
Government departments,
Independent bodies or tribunals.
These laws define:
The scope of administrative discretion,
The process to be followed,
The rights of review or appeal.
C. Creating Review Mechanisms
Parliament legislates for:
Internal reviews within agencies,
Merits review (e.g., by VCAT),
Judicial review (under the Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic) and Supreme Court Rules – Order 56).
D. Oversight of Delegated Legislation
Through the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee (SARC), Parliament reviews:
Subordinate legislation (regulations, rules),
Ensures they are within legal limits and do not violate rights.
E. Setting Procedural Safeguards
Parliament includes provisions in Acts to guarantee:
Procedural fairness,
Right to be heard,
Requirement to give reasons,
Appeal rights.
📚 Key Case Law Illustrating the Victorian Parliament’s Role in Administrative Law
Let’s now examine four major cases that highlight how Victorian courts interpret and apply Parliament’s role in administrative law.
🔹 1. Director of Housing v Sudi (2011) 33 VR 559 (Vic CA)
📌 Facts:
Sudi was a tenant facing eviction under the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (Vic).
He argued that his human rights were violated, invoking the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic).
⚖️ Held:
The Magistrates' Court had no jurisdiction to conduct judicial review of administrative decisions.
Such review is reserved for the Supreme Court under Order 56 and the Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic).
✅ Significance:
Highlights how Parliament defines jurisdictional limits of courts and tribunals.
Reiterates that judicial review powers are created and structured by Parliament.
🔹 2. Kracke v Mental Health Review Board (2009) 29 VAR 1 (VCAT)
📌 Facts:
A mental health patient challenged the delay in a review of his status by the Mental Health Review Board, as required by statute.
Raised issues under both the authorising Act and the Charter.
⚖️ Held:
VCAT found the Board failed to act within the statutory timeframe, breaching both administrative law and human rights obligations.
The Board’s power was statutory, and Parliament’s failure to require timely review violated basic rights.
✅ Significance:
Shows that administrative bodies are constrained by statute.
Courts interpret Parliament’s intent to ensure fairness and timeliness.
🔹 3. Secretary to the Department of Justice v Osland (2007) 18 VR 378
📌 Facts:
Concerned a Freedom of Information (FOI) dispute.
Osland sought access to legal advice received by the Victorian Government.
⚖️ Held:
The Supreme Court held that Parliament’s FOI legislation was subject to interpretation consistent with common law principles of fairness and transparency.
The exemptions under the Act were to be narrowly construed.
✅ Significance:
Demonstrates the court’s role in interpreting Parliamentary intent.
Emphasizes Parliament's power to control information flow, but within legal and rights-based limits.
🔹 4. Foster v Secretary to the Department of Justice (2012) 36 VR 1
📌 Facts:
Foster was denied a Working with Children Check.
He challenged the decision, arguing that the statutory scheme unfairly limited his right to seek review.
⚖️ Held:
The Supreme Court ruled that while Parliament can limit review rights, it must do so clearly and unambiguously.
Statutory appeal provisions did not exclude the court’s jurisdiction for judicial review.
✅ Significance:
Reinforces the principle that Parliament must speak clearly to oust judicial review.
Courts protect individuals’ rights to challenge government action unless explicitly removed by Parliament.
🔹 5. Kuek v Victoria Legal Aid (2001) 3 VR 404
📌 Facts:
Applicant challenged a decision by Victoria Legal Aid to refuse funding.
Question was whether this decision was reviewable under the Administrative Law Act.
⚖️ Held:
The Court ruled that only decisions that affect legal rights or obligations are reviewable.
Parliament’s legislation gave broad discretion to VLA, limiting the scope for review.
✅ Significance:
Parliament can shape the scope of administrative power.
The court deferred to Parliament’s intention in granting broad discretion to agencies.
🧾 Summary Table of Cases
| Case | Focus | Parliament’s Role |
|---|---|---|
| Director of Housing v Sudi | Jurisdiction of courts | Parliament allocates judicial review powers |
| Kracke v Mental Health Review Board | Timeliness in administrative decision-making | Parliament defines timeframes; courts enforce fairness |
| Osland (FOI case) | Access to government documents | Parliament creates statutory rights and exemptions |
| Foster v Dept of Justice | Working with Children Checks | Parliament must clearly limit review rights |
| Kuek v VLA | Discretionary decisions | Parliament defines scope and reviewability of decisions |
🎯 Conclusion
The Parliament of Victoria plays a central role in creating, shaping, and controlling the administrative law landscape by:
Establishing statutory frameworks for agencies and tribunals,
Delegating powers while setting limits and procedures,
Providing (or limiting) rights of review, and
Being subject to judicial interpretation of its intent.
While Parliament controls the architecture of administrative law, the courts act as interpreters and guardians of fairness and legality within that framework.
RELATED Blog
0 comments