The rise to prominence of administrative law in the second half of the twentieth century is often remarked upon as the greatest legal development of the period. In this process there has been considerable borrowing of ideas and learning from experiences elsewhere in the common law world. This volume brings together administrative law scholars and judges from around the globe to address important issues in the field and to honour the career of one of the leading administrative lawyers in the Anglo-Commonwealth world, Professor David Mullan. Editors Grant Huscroft and Michael Taggart have identified the broad themes in Mullan's work - procedural fairness; scope of review and deference; the interrelationship of administrative law and human rights; the legitimacy of state regulation and tribunal adjudication; common law comparativism - and invited contributions on those themes from leading scholars in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, South Africa, and the United States. A fitting tribute to a great scholar, Inside and Outside Canadian Administrative Law will prove fascinating to students, teachers, and practitioners of administrative law as well as policy makers and political scientists.

A new framework for understanding contemporary administrative law, through a comparative analysis of case law from Australia, Canada, England, Ireland, and New Zealand. The author argues that the field is structured by four values: individual self-realisation, good administration, electoral legitimacy and decisional autonomy.

In the modern administrative state, hundreds if not thousands of officials wield powers that can be used to the benefit or detriment of individuals and corporations. When the exercise of these powers is challenged, a great deal can be at stake. Courts are confronted with difficult questions about how to apply the general principles of administrative law in different contexts. Based on a comparative theoretical analysis of the allocation of authority between the organs of government, A Theory of Deference in Administrative Law provides courts with a methodology to apply no matter how complex the subject matter. The firm theoretical foundation of deference is fully exposed and a comprehensive doctrine of curial deference is developed for application by courts in judicial review of administrative action. A wide scope is urged, spanning the whole spectrum of government regulation, thereby ensuring wide access to public law remedies.

A comprehensive overview of the field of comparative administrative law that builds on the first edition with many new and revised chapters, additional topics and extended geographical coverage. This Research Handbook’s broad, multi-method approach combines history and social science with more strictly legal analyses. This new edition demonstrates the growth and dynamism of recent efforts – spearheaded by the first edition – to stimulate comparative research in administrative law and public law more generally, reaching across different countries and scholarly disciplines.

During the past decade, administrative law has experienced remarkable development. It has consistently been one of the most dynamic and potent areas of legal innovation and of judicial activism. It has expanded its reach into an ever broadening sphere of public and private activities. Largely through the mechanism of judicial review, the judges in several jurisdictions have extended the ambit of the traditional remedies, partly in response to a perceived need to fill an accountability vacuum created by the privatisation of public enterprises, the contracting-out of public services, and the deregulation of industry and commerce. The essays in this volume focus upon these and other shifts in administrative law, and in doing so they draw upon the experiences of several jurisdictions: the UK, the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The result is a wide-ranging and forceful analysis of the scope, development and future direction of administrative law.

This book of essays celebrates Mark Aronson's contribution to administrative law. As joint author of the leading Australian text on judicial review of administrative action, Aronson's work is well-known to public lawyers throughout the common law world and this is reflected in the list of contributors from the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK. The introduction comes from Justice Michael Kirby of the High Court of Australia. The essays reflect Aronson's interests in judicial review, non-judicial grievance mechanisms, problems of proof and evidence, and the boundaries of public and private law. Amongst the contributors, Peter Cane, Elizabeth Fisher, and Linda Pearson write on administrative adjudication and decision-making, Anita Stuhmcke writes on Ombudsmen, and Robin Creyke and John McMillan, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, write on charters, codes and 'soft law'. There are evaluations of the profound influence of human rights law on judicial review from the UK by Sir Jack Beatson and Thomas Poole and from Canada by David Mullan. Matthew Groves and Chief Justice James Spigelman address developing themes in judicial review, while Carol Harlow, Richard Rawlings, Michael Taggart and Janet McLean follow Aronson's interests into the private side of public law. An American perspective is added by Alfred Aman and Jack Beermann.

Around the common law world, the law of judicial review of administrative action has changed dramatically in recent decades, accelerating a centuries-long process of incremental evolution. This book offers a fresh framework for understanding the core features of contemporary administrative law. Through comparative analysis of case law from Australia, Canada, England, Ireland, and New Zealand, the author develops an interpretive approach by reference to four values: individual self-realisation, good administration, electoral legitimacy, and decisional autonomy. The interaction of this plurality of values explains the structure of the vast field of judicial review of administrative action: institutional structures, procedural fairness, substantive review, remedies, restrictions on remedies, and the scope of judicial review. Addressing this wide array of subjects in detail, the book demonstrates how a pluralist approach, with the values being employed in a complementary and balanced fashion, can enhance our understanding of administrative law. Furthermore, such an approach can guide the future development of the law of judicial review of administrative action, a point illustrated by a careful analysis of the unsettled doctrinal area of legitimate expectation. The book closes by arguing that the author's values-based, pluralist framework supports the legitimacy of contemporary administrative law which, although sometimes called into question, facilitates the flourishing of individuals, of public administration, and of the liberal democratic system.