Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The courts' approach to the giving of reasons in public decisions is to ensure transparency, accountability, and fairness in the decision-making process. This is essential for maintaining public trust and confidence in the administration of justice and public institutions.
One case law example that illustrates the courts' approach to the giving of reasons in public decisions is R v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy [1924] 1 KB 256. In this case, the court emphasized the importance of providing reasons for decisions, stating that "justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done." The lack of reasons in this case led to the decision being quashed, highlighting the significance of providing clear and transparent justifications for public decisions.
Another case law example is R (on the application of Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] UKHL 23. In this case, the House of Lords emphasized the duty of public authorities to provide adequate reasons for their decisions, stating that "the giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration." The court held that the failure to provide reasons for a decision could render it unlawful, further emphasizing the importance of transparency and accountability in public decision-making.
Overall, these case law examples demonstrate the courts' approach to the giving of reasons in public decisions, emphasizing the need for transparency, accountability, and fairness in the decision-making process. Failure to provide adequate reasons for public decisions can result in them being quashed or deemed unlawful, highlighting the significance of providing clear and transparent justifications for such decisions.
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Legitimate expectation in decision makin...View Answer
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
View Answer
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Failure to give reasons amounts to arbitrariness
B) Giving reasons will prejudice the applicant's chances of successfully applying for judicial review
C) Reasons should be provided in the interests of fairness
D) Reasons would highlight the need for further public funding
Correct Answer
verified
D
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Bias in decision making is a serious con...View Answer
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
View Answer
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Breach of natural justice
B) The rule against bias
C) Error of law
D) Failure to give reasons
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) 5
B) 6
C) 7
D) 8
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
A fair trial is essential to ensuring ju...View Answer
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
View Answer
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The courts' approach to the admissibility of evidence in public decision making is guided by the principles of fairness, transparency, and reasonableness. In the case law, courts have consistently emphasized the importance of allowing all relevant evidence to be considered in public decision making processes, while also ensuring that the evidence is reliable and credible.
One key case that outlines the courts' approach to the admissibility of evidence in public decision making is R v. Sussex Justices, Ex parte McCarthy. In this case, the court held that the principle of natural justice requires that all parties have the opportunity to present their evidence and arguments, and that the decision maker must consider all relevant evidence before making a decision. This case established the principle that decision makers must act fairly and impartially, and must consider all relevant evidence in reaching their decisions.
Another important case is Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v. Wednesbury Corporation, which established the principle of reasonableness in public decision making. The court held that a decision maker's decision must be based on relevant considerations and must not be so unreasonable that no reasonable decision maker could have reached the same conclusion. This case highlights the importance of ensuring that the evidence considered in public decision making is relevant and reliable.
Overall, the courts' approach to the admissibility of evidence in public decision making is guided by the principles of fairness, transparency, and reasonableness. Decision makers are required to consider all relevant evidence and to ensure that their decisions are based on reliable and credible evidence. Failure to do so may result in a decision being challenged and overturned by the courts.
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
A) The giving of assurances
B) Guidance
C) Policy
D) Acting in a manner so as to create an expectation
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Procedural impropriety under statute ref...View Answer
Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
View Answer
Showing 1 - 16 of 16
Related Exams