| Summary: | <p>This thesis puts forward a framework of good administration in judicial review that encompasses two limbs. The first limb safeguards a claimant’s individual interests while the second limb allows the claimant to assert the collective interest of the public in the control of public power. The objective is to provide courts and commentators with a holistic and structured framework which is capable of guiding and informing their approach to procedural issues of standing and waiver, administrative discretion and remedies in judicial review.</p>
<p>In order to enhance the protection afforded to these interests under this two-pronged framework, this thesis adopts a more nuanced approach towards the public and private divide and explores whether judicious conceptual borrowing is capable of offering new answers to difficult issues. For instance, to obtain guidance on how procedural issues of standing and waiver should be addressed under the framework, this thesis undertakes an examination of how these issues are addressed in systems dealing wholly with public wrongs like criminal law and how they are dealt with in private law.</p>
<p>This thesis also considers how the protection afforded to legitimate expectations, which constitute important individual interests under the first limb of the framework, may be enhanced by adapting contractual and estoppel principles. This thesis then examines how a modified fiduciary approach may offer additional protection for the public interest in the control of public power under the second limb of the framework. To demonstrate that conceptual borrowing is capable of functioning as a two-street, this thesis also considers how public law concepts may enhance the control of contractual discretion. The final substantive chapter of this thesis explores how the private law notion of damages may elevate the protection afforded to the interests under both limbs of the framework.</p>
|
|---|