This chapter complements Chapter 5 in Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition, which investigates the role of parliament and other bodies, such as auditors-general and ombudsmen, in scrutinising and investigating the actions of government.

This chapter complements Chapter 3 in Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition, which investigates the various classes of executive power, both statutory and non-statutory. The vast majority of executive power is conferred by statute. The extracts emphasise the importance of statutory interpretation when establishing the scope of express and implied powers. The final two extracts consider prerogative power.

This chapter complements Chapter 7 of Government Accountability: Australia Administrative Law, third edition. An important point is that merits review is a creature of statute. The availability of merits review, the authority responsible for conducting review, the nature of review, the process to be followed and the remedies available in a given case can only be determined by careful examination of the relevant statutory provisions. For this reason, this chapter is not a collection of canonical authorities on merits review; few, if any, such authorities exist. The first two sections of this chapter provide government perspectives on the need for, aims of, and potential drawbacks of, merits review. The third section consists of two case studies of merits review. These cases are chosen to show how a merits review application might proceed; how merits review arguments are constructed; and the possible outcomes of merits review.

This chapter complements Chapter 13 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. The cases extracted in this chapter illustrate the operation of limits on power that can be discerned from the statute conferring the power: misconceiving the nature or scope of the power, jurisdictional facts (both objective and subjective), procedural error, improper delegation, and mandatory and prohibited considerations. The cases in this chapter are worth studying both for their exposition of legal principles, and for the application of those principles to the facts. O’Reilly v Commissioners of the State Bank of Victoria, for example, is not only the leading Australian case on improper delegation, but also an excellent example of the reasoning process used to determine whether delegation is permissible in a particular situation. With one exception, the cases in this chapter are decisions of the High Court of Australia. The exception is Liversidge v Anderson – which is included because Lord Atkin’s dissenting judgment is one of the most celebrated administrative law judgments.

This chapter complements Chapter 10 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. The supervisory role of the courts is powerful and constitutionally entrenched. However, any system that enables one arm of government to supervise the actions of another requires a certain level of restraint to balance the separate powers appropriately. The exclusions built into the statutory judicial review schemes and the focus in common law and constitutional judicial review cases upon jurisdictional error impose limitations on the scope of judicial review. This chapter considers further limits on judicial review, specifically justiciability, standing, and attempts by parliament to impose statutory limits.

This chapter complements Chapter 6 in Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. Information disclosure is fundamental to all areas of administrative law. Whether a request for information comes from a superior court, a parliamentary committee, a royal commissioner, an ombudsman, a journalist, or an individual questioning a government decision, access to information is essential when holding governments to account. The sources in this chapter consider secrecy, unofficial disclosures by leaks and whistleblowers, statutory obligations of the executive to publish information, and the rights of individuals to apply for access to government-held information and reasons for decisions.

This chapter complements Chapter 14 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. The grounds of review in this chapter arise as a matter of general presumption or implication, unless excluded by statute. The extracts relate to the grounds of improper purpose, acting under dictation and inflexible application of policy, unreasonableness, irrationality/illogicality, and no evidence. Several of these cases illustrate the interplay between different grounds of review.

This chapter complements Chapter 10 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. The supervisory role of the courts is powerful and constitutionally entrenched. However, any system that enables one arm of government to supervise the actions of another requires a certain level of restraint to balance the separate powers appropriately. The exclusions built into the statutory judicial review schemes and the focus in common law and constitutional judicial review cases upon jurisdictional error impose limitations on the scope of judicial review. This chapter considers further limits on judicial review, specifically justiciability, standing, and attempts by parliament to impose statutory limits.

This chapter complements Chapter 9 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. It introduces the concepts of statutory appeal on questions of law, statutory construction, and judicial review. The sources set out the framework for judicial review at state and Commonwealth level. The sources consider the foundations of the courts’ jurisdiction to review the decision-making processes of inferior courts and the executive government, and the concepts of jurisdictional error and error of law on the face of the record.

This chapter complements Chapter 12 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. Many significant administrative law decisions concern the rules of procedural fairness. The cases in this chapter have been chosen for their significance in establishing key principles or because they provide striking illustrations of trends in the High Court’s approach to procedural fairness. The content of each case extract has been selected to show not only the High Court’s exposition of legal principles, but also the application of those principles to factual situations. Although the rules of procedural fairness apply to a wide range of administrative and judicial decisions, many of the leading cases (especially in relation to the hearing rule) have arisen in the context of migration. This is reflected in the subject matter of the cases extracted in this chapter.

This chapter complements Chapter 11 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. It introduces grounds of review under statutory schemes of judicial review.

The cases and materials in this book complement the introduction to administrative law provided in Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition (‘the textbook’). It is assumed that readers of this book will also have access to the textbook. The chapters in this book mirror those in the textbook. We envisage that readers will begin their study of a topic by reading the relevant section of the textbook and will turn to this book to study key cases and concepts in greater depth. This introductory chapter provides a range of perspectives on the relationship between administrative law and the rule of law, and introduces the overarching concept that we use to explain administrative law principles and mechanisms: the idea of accountability.

The cases and materials in this book complement the introduction to administrative law provided in Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition (‘the textbook’). It is assumed that readers of this book will also have access to the textbook. The chapters in this book mirror those in the textbook. We envisage that readers will begin their study of a topic by reading the relevant section of the textbook and will turn to this book to study key cases and concepts in greater depth. This introductory chapter provides a range of perspectives on the relationship between administrative law and the rule of law, and introduces the overarching concept that we use to explain administrative law principles and mechanisms: the idea of accountability.

This chapter complements Chapter 14 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. The grounds of review in this chapter arise as a matter of general presumption or implication, unless excluded by statute. The extracts relate to the grounds of improper purpose, acting under dictation and inflexible application of policy, unreasonableness, irrationality/illogicality, and no evidence. Several of these cases illustrate the interplay between different grounds of review.

This chapter complements Chapter 3 in Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition, which investigates the various classes of executive power, both statutory and non-statutory. The vast majority of executive power is conferred by statute. The extracts emphasise the importance of statutory interpretation when establishing the scope of express and implied powers. The final two extracts consider prerogative power.

This chapter complements Chapter 9 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. It introduces the concepts of statutory appeal on questions of law, statutory construction, and judicial review. The sources set out the framework for judicial review at state and Commonwealth level. The sources consider the foundations of the courts’ jurisdiction to review the decision-making processes of inferior courts and the executive government, and the concepts of jurisdictional error and error of law on the face of the record.

This chapter complements Chapter 4 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. The chapter contains several case extracts on the issue of judicial review of delegated legislation. However, judicial review cases provide only a small part of the picture of the practical and substantive issues surrounding delegated legislation. The other material in this chapter fills in the picture. An extract from the Australian Law Reform Commission’s report, Traditional Rights and Freedoms, highlights the problems with over¬reliance on delegated, rather than primary, legislation. A case study of delegated legislation being disallowed has been included to show how the process of parliamentary scrutiny works.

This chapter complements Chapter 15 of Government Accountability: Australian Administrative Law, third edition. If an applicant is entitled to judicial review and successfully argues one or more grounds, what is the outcome? When judicial review is successful, the government action or decision that has been challenged will have been found to be unlawful. The sources in this chapter consider the consequences that flow from that finding, and the remedies that may be available.

This chapter complements Chapter 7 of Government Accountability: Australia Administrative Law, third edition. An important point is that merits review is a creature of statute. The availability of merits review, the authority responsible for conducting review, the nature of review, the process to be followed and the remedies available in a given case can only be determined by careful examination of the relevant statutory provisions. For this reason, this chapter is not a collection of canonical authorities on merits review; few, if any, such authorities exist. The first two sections of this chapter provide government perspectives on the need for, aims of, and potential drawbacks of, merits review. The third section consists of two case studies of merits review. These cases are chosen to show how a merits review application might proceed; how merits review arguments are constructed; and the possible outcomes of merits review.