• Help and information
  • Comparative
  • Constitutional & Administrative
  • Criminal Justice
  • Criminology
  • Environment
  • Equity & Trusts
  • Competition
  • Human Rights & Immigration
  • Intellectual Property
  • International Criminal
  • International Environmental
  • Private International
  • Public International
  • IT & Communications
  • Jurisprudence & Philosophy of Law
  • Legal Practice Course
  • English Legal System (ELS)
  • Legal Skills & Practice
  • Medical & Healthcare
  • Study & Revision
  • Business and Government
  • Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Administrative LawText and Materials

Administrative Law: Text and Materials (5th edn)

  • Acknowledgements
  • Table of Cases
  • Table of Statutes
  • Table of Statutory Instruments
  • Table of European Union Legislation and International Treaties and Conventions
  • List of Abbreviations
  • 1. Introductory Matters
  • 2. Jurisdiction
  • 3. The Status of Unlawful Administrative Action
  • 4. The Scope of Public Law Principles
  • 5. Retention of Discretion
  • 6. Legitimate Expectations
  • 7. Abuse of Discretion I
  • 8. Abuse of Discretion II
  • 9. Bias, Impartiality, and Independence
  • 10. Procedural Fairness
  • 11. Giving Reasons for Decisions
  • 12. Remedies
  • 13. The Judicial Review Procedure
  • 14. Restriction of Remedies
  • 15. Liability of Public Authorities
  • 16. Delegated Legislation
  • 17. Inquiries
  • 18. Statutory Tribunals
  • 19. Ombudsmen

p. 187 6. Legitimate Expectations

  • Mark Elliott Mark Elliott Professor of Public Law, University of Cambridge
  •  and  Jason Varuhas Jason Varuhas Associate Professor, University of Melbourne
  • https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198719465.003.0006
  • Published in print: 22 December 2016
  • Published online: September 2017

This chapter examines the doctrine of legitimate expectation and its application to lawfully created expectations as well as the extent, if any, to which it may protect ‘unlawfully generated expectations’. It first explains why legitimate expectations must be protected and goes on to discuss the relationship between two variables that are in play in any situation which potentially engages the legitimate expectation principle: that of legitimacy and that of the mode of protection which may be extended to expectations which satisfy the first criterion. The chapter then tackles the problematic question of unlawfully created expectations, focusing on the importance of securing fairness for the individual. It also considers the issues of constitutionality and public interest, along with representations issued by unauthorized officials and representations concerning action which is ultra vires the agency.

  • representations
  • legitimate expectations
  • unlawfully created expectations
  • constitutionality
  • public interest
  • ultra vires
  • lawfully created expectations

You do not currently have access to this chapter

Please sign in to access the full content.

Access to the full content requires a subscription

Printed from Oxford Law Trove. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 30 April 2024

  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Accessibility
  • [66.249.64.20|195.158.225.244]
  • 195.158.225.244

Characters remaining 500 /500

13. Grounds for judicial review: procedural impropriety, natural justice, and legitimate expectation

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the grounds for judicial review. These include procedural impropriety, which means breach of the rules of natural justice, and failure to comply with statutory procedural requirements. This chapter looks at the definitional elements of the rules of natural justice, whether the rules of natural justice apply in principle, the extent to which the rules of natural justice apply, disciplinary hearings, licensing cases, pecuniary and personal bias, whether or not a fair trial has taken place, and the right to be given reasons for a decision. This chapter also considers legitimate expectation as a ground for judicial review.

  • Related Documents

13. Grounds for judicial reviewProcedural impropriety, natural justice, and legitimate expectation

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the grounds for judicial review. These include procedural impropriety, which means breach of the rules of natural justice and failure to comply with statutory procedural requirements. This chapter looks at the definitional elements of the rules of natural justice, whether the rules of natural justice apply in principle, the extent to which the rules of natural justice apply, disciplinary hearing, licensing cases pecuniary and personal bias, whether or not a fair trial has taken place and the right to be given reasons for a decision. This chapter also considers legitimate expectation as a ground for judicial review.

The Standard of Judicial Review in EU Competition Law Enforcement and Its Compatibility with the Right to a Fair Trial Under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

10. administrative law:.

The Q&A series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each chapter includes typical questions; diagram problem and essay answer plans, suggested answers, notes of caution, tips on obtaining extra marks, the key debates on each topic and suggestions on further reading. This chapter is about judicial review. This is the means by which the citizen can use the courts to ensure that a public body obeys the law. The questions in the chapter deal with issues such as the erratic development of administrative law; the procedure to apply for judicial review; the right to apply (locus standi), procedural ultra vires; natural justice; and substantive ultra vires.

14. The grounds for judicial review

This chapter considers the grounds on which public decisions may be challenged before the courts. It begins with an overview of two cases—Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corpn (1948) and Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (1985). The importance of these two cases is their distillation of the general principles. The discussion then covers the different grounds for judicial review: illegality, relevant/irrelevant considerations, fiduciary duty, fettering of a discretion, improper purpose, bad faith, irrationality, proportionality, procedural impropriety, natural justice, legitimate expectations, the right to a fair hearing, reasons, and the rule against bias. It is noted that principles often overlap, so that a challenge to a public law decision may be based on different principles.

18. Procedural Impropriety

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. A public authority must have the legal power to act; if that power is conferred by statute, it may also specify the procedure that must be used prior to an action or a decision being taken. This is what is known as a ‘statutory procedure’, because it is specified in a statute. The statute may, for example, require the authority to give notice of its intention to take action in a certain way, to consult interested groups, or to tell individuals that they have the right to appeal from an adverse decision. If the authority does not comply, then this is a breach of the statutory procedure and may be reviewed as a procedural impropriety. This chapter discusses the judicial review of procedural impropriety. It covers the rules of natural justice; the right to be heard; legitimate expectation; the detailed requirements of natural justice; the rule against bias; and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

10. Introduction to administrative lawThe foundations and extent of judicial review

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the concept of judicial review. Judicial review allows a High Court judge to examine the lawfulness of decisions made by public bodies carrying out their public functions and enactments where there is no right of appeal or where all avenues of appeal have been exhausted. The defendant must be a public body, the subject matter of a claim must be a public law matter, and the claimant must have the right to claim. This chapter also looks at the basis procedure for judicial review.

10. Introduction to administrative law: the foundations and extent of judicial review

Export citation format, share document.

  • Search Menu
  • Browse content in Arts and Humanities
  • Browse content in Archaeology
  • Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
  • Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
  • Archaeology by Region
  • Archaeology of Religion
  • Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
  • Biblical Archaeology
  • Contemporary and Public Archaeology
  • Environmental Archaeology
  • Historical Archaeology
  • History and Theory of Archaeology
  • Industrial Archaeology
  • Landscape Archaeology
  • Mortuary Archaeology
  • Prehistoric Archaeology
  • Underwater Archaeology
  • Urban Archaeology
  • Zooarchaeology
  • Browse content in Architecture
  • Architectural Structure and Design
  • History of Architecture
  • Residential and Domestic Buildings
  • Theory of Architecture
  • Browse content in Art
  • Art Subjects and Themes
  • History of Art
  • Industrial and Commercial Art
  • Theory of Art
  • Biographical Studies
  • Byzantine Studies
  • Browse content in Classical Studies
  • Classical Literature
  • Classical Reception
  • Classical History
  • Classical Philosophy
  • Classical Mythology
  • Classical Art and Architecture
  • Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
  • Greek and Roman Archaeology
  • Greek and Roman Epigraphy
  • Greek and Roman Law
  • Greek and Roman Papyrology
  • Late Antiquity
  • Religion in the Ancient World
  • Digital Humanities
  • Browse content in History
  • Colonialism and Imperialism
  • Diplomatic History
  • Environmental History
  • Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
  • Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
  • Historical Geography
  • History by Period
  • History of Agriculture
  • History of Education
  • History of Emotions
  • History of Gender and Sexuality
  • Industrial History
  • Intellectual History
  • International History
  • Labour History
  • Legal and Constitutional History
  • Local and Family History
  • Maritime History
  • Military History
  • National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
  • Oral History
  • Political History
  • Public History
  • Regional and National History
  • Revolutions and Rebellions
  • Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
  • Social and Cultural History
  • Theory, Methods, and Historiography
  • Urban History
  • World History
  • Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
  • Language Learning (Specific Skills)
  • Language Teaching Theory and Methods
  • Browse content in Linguistics
  • Applied Linguistics
  • Cognitive Linguistics
  • Computational Linguistics
  • Forensic Linguistics
  • Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
  • Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
  • History of English
  • Language Variation
  • Language Families
  • Language Acquisition
  • Language Evolution
  • Language Reference
  • Lexicography
  • Linguistic Theories
  • Linguistic Typology
  • Linguistic Anthropology
  • Phonetics and Phonology
  • Psycholinguistics
  • Sociolinguistics
  • Translation and Interpretation
  • Writing Systems
  • Browse content in Literature
  • Bibliography
  • Children's Literature Studies
  • Literary Studies (Modernism)
  • Literary Studies (Asian)
  • Literary Studies (European)
  • Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
  • Literary Studies (Romanticism)
  • Literary Studies (American)
  • Literary Studies - World
  • Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
  • Literary Studies (19th Century)
  • Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
  • Literary Studies (African American Literature)
  • Literary Studies (British and Irish)
  • Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
  • Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
  • Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
  • Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
  • Literary Studies (History of the Book)
  • Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
  • Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
  • Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
  • Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
  • Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
  • Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
  • Literary Studies (War Literature)
  • Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
  • Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
  • Mythology and Folklore
  • Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
  • Browse content in Media Studies
  • Browse content in Music
  • Applied Music
  • Dance and Music
  • Ethics in Music
  • Ethnomusicology
  • Gender and Sexuality in Music
  • Medicine and Music
  • Music Cultures
  • Music and Culture
  • Music and Religion
  • Music and Media
  • Music Education and Pedagogy
  • Music Theory and Analysis
  • Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
  • Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
  • Musicology and Music History
  • Performance Practice and Studies
  • Race and Ethnicity in Music
  • Sound Studies
  • Browse content in Performing Arts
  • Browse content in Philosophy
  • Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
  • Epistemology
  • Feminist Philosophy
  • History of Western Philosophy
  • Metaphysics
  • Moral Philosophy
  • Non-Western Philosophy
  • Philosophy of Action
  • Philosophy of Law
  • Philosophy of Religion
  • Philosophy of Science
  • Philosophy of Language
  • Philosophy of Mind
  • Philosophy of Perception
  • Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
  • Practical Ethics
  • Social and Political Philosophy
  • Browse content in Religion
  • Biblical Studies
  • Christianity
  • East Asian Religions
  • History of Religion
  • Judaism and Jewish Studies
  • Qumran Studies
  • Religion and Education
  • Religion and Health
  • Religion and Politics
  • Religion and Science
  • Religion and Law
  • Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
  • Religious Studies
  • Browse content in Society and Culture
  • Cookery, Food, and Drink
  • Cultural Studies
  • Customs and Traditions
  • Ethical Issues and Debates
  • Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
  • Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
  • Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
  • Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
  • Sports and Outdoor Recreation
  • Technology and Society
  • Travel and Holiday
  • Visual Culture
  • Browse content in Law
  • Arbitration
  • Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
  • Commercial Law
  • Company Law
  • Browse content in Comparative Law
  • Systems of Law
  • Competition Law
  • Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
  • Government Powers
  • Judicial Review
  • Local Government Law
  • Military and Defence Law
  • Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
  • Construction Law
  • Contract Law
  • Browse content in Criminal Law
  • Criminal Procedure
  • Criminal Evidence Law
  • Sentencing and Punishment
  • Employment and Labour Law
  • Environment and Energy Law
  • Browse content in Financial Law
  • Banking Law
  • Insolvency Law
  • History of Law
  • Human Rights and Immigration
  • Intellectual Property Law
  • Browse content in International Law
  • Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
  • Public International Law
  • IT and Communications Law
  • Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
  • Law and Society
  • Law and Politics
  • Browse content in Legal System and Practice
  • Courts and Procedure
  • Legal Skills and Practice
  • Primary Sources of Law
  • Regulation of Legal Profession
  • Medical and Healthcare Law
  • Browse content in Policing
  • Criminal Investigation and Detection
  • Police and Security Services
  • Police Procedure and Law
  • Police Regional Planning
  • Browse content in Property Law
  • Personal Property Law
  • Study and Revision
  • Terrorism and National Security Law
  • Browse content in Trusts Law
  • Wills and Probate or Succession
  • Browse content in Medicine and Health
  • Browse content in Allied Health Professions
  • Arts Therapies
  • Clinical Science
  • Dietetics and Nutrition
  • Occupational Therapy
  • Operating Department Practice
  • Physiotherapy
  • Radiography
  • Speech and Language Therapy
  • Browse content in Anaesthetics
  • General Anaesthesia
  • Neuroanaesthesia
  • Browse content in Clinical Medicine
  • Acute Medicine
  • Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Clinical Genetics
  • Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
  • Dermatology
  • Endocrinology and Diabetes
  • Gastroenterology
  • Genito-urinary Medicine
  • Geriatric Medicine
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Medical Oncology
  • Medical Toxicology
  • Pain Medicine
  • Palliative Medicine
  • Rehabilitation Medicine
  • Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
  • Rheumatology
  • Sleep Medicine
  • Sports and Exercise Medicine
  • Clinical Neuroscience
  • Community Medical Services
  • Critical Care
  • Emergency Medicine
  • Forensic Medicine
  • Haematology
  • History of Medicine
  • Medical Ethics
  • Browse content in Medical Dentistry
  • Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
  • Paediatric Dentistry
  • Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
  • Surgical Dentistry
  • Browse content in Medical Skills
  • Clinical Skills
  • Communication Skills
  • Nursing Skills
  • Surgical Skills
  • Medical Statistics and Methodology
  • Browse content in Neurology
  • Clinical Neurophysiology
  • Neuropathology
  • Nursing Studies
  • Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
  • Gynaecology
  • Occupational Medicine
  • Ophthalmology
  • Otolaryngology (ENT)
  • Browse content in Paediatrics
  • Neonatology
  • Browse content in Pathology
  • Chemical Pathology
  • Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
  • Histopathology
  • Medical Microbiology and Virology
  • Patient Education and Information
  • Browse content in Pharmacology
  • Psychopharmacology
  • Browse content in Popular Health
  • Caring for Others
  • Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • Self-help and Personal Development
  • Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
  • Cell Biology
  • Molecular Biology and Genetics
  • Reproduction, Growth and Development
  • Primary Care
  • Professional Development in Medicine
  • Browse content in Psychiatry
  • Addiction Medicine
  • Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
  • Forensic Psychiatry
  • Learning Disabilities
  • Old Age Psychiatry
  • Psychotherapy
  • Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
  • Epidemiology
  • Public Health
  • Browse content in Radiology
  • Clinical Radiology
  • Interventional Radiology
  • Nuclear Medicine
  • Radiation Oncology
  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Browse content in Surgery
  • Cardiothoracic Surgery
  • Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
  • General Surgery
  • Neurosurgery
  • Paediatric Surgery
  • Peri-operative Care
  • Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
  • Surgical Oncology
  • Transplant Surgery
  • Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
  • Vascular Surgery
  • Browse content in Science and Mathematics
  • Browse content in Biological Sciences
  • Aquatic Biology
  • Biochemistry
  • Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology and Conservation
  • Evolutionary Biology
  • Genetics and Genomics
  • Microbiology
  • Molecular and Cell Biology
  • Natural History
  • Plant Sciences and Forestry
  • Research Methods in Life Sciences
  • Structural Biology
  • Systems Biology
  • Zoology and Animal Sciences
  • Browse content in Chemistry
  • Analytical Chemistry
  • Computational Chemistry
  • Crystallography
  • Environmental Chemistry
  • Industrial Chemistry
  • Inorganic Chemistry
  • Materials Chemistry
  • Medicinal Chemistry
  • Mineralogy and Gems
  • Organic Chemistry
  • Physical Chemistry
  • Polymer Chemistry
  • Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
  • Theoretical Chemistry
  • Browse content in Computer Science
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Computer Architecture and Logic Design
  • Game Studies
  • Human-Computer Interaction
  • Mathematical Theory of Computation
  • Programming Languages
  • Software Engineering
  • Systems Analysis and Design
  • Virtual Reality
  • Browse content in Computing
  • Business Applications
  • Computer Games
  • Computer Security
  • Computer Networking and Communications
  • Digital Lifestyle
  • Graphical and Digital Media Applications
  • Operating Systems
  • Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
  • Atmospheric Sciences
  • Environmental Geography
  • Geology and the Lithosphere
  • Maps and Map-making
  • Meteorology and Climatology
  • Oceanography and Hydrology
  • Palaeontology
  • Physical Geography and Topography
  • Regional Geography
  • Soil Science
  • Urban Geography
  • Browse content in Engineering and Technology
  • Agriculture and Farming
  • Biological Engineering
  • Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
  • Electronics and Communications Engineering
  • Energy Technology
  • Engineering (General)
  • Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
  • History of Engineering and Technology
  • Mechanical Engineering and Materials
  • Technology of Industrial Chemistry
  • Transport Technology and Trades
  • Browse content in Environmental Science
  • Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
  • Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
  • Environmental Sustainability
  • Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
  • Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
  • Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
  • Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
  • Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
  • Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
  • History of Science and Technology
  • Browse content in Materials Science
  • Ceramics and Glasses
  • Composite Materials
  • Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
  • Nanotechnology
  • Browse content in Mathematics
  • Applied Mathematics
  • Biomathematics and Statistics
  • History of Mathematics
  • Mathematical Education
  • Mathematical Finance
  • Mathematical Analysis
  • Numerical and Computational Mathematics
  • Probability and Statistics
  • Pure Mathematics
  • Browse content in Neuroscience
  • Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
  • Development of the Nervous System
  • Disorders of the Nervous System
  • History of Neuroscience
  • Invertebrate Neurobiology
  • Molecular and Cellular Systems
  • Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
  • Neuroscientific Techniques
  • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • Browse content in Physics
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
  • Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
  • Biological and Medical Physics
  • Classical Mechanics
  • Computational Physics
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
  • History of Physics
  • Mathematical and Statistical Physics
  • Measurement Science
  • Nuclear Physics
  • Particles and Fields
  • Plasma Physics
  • Quantum Physics
  • Relativity and Gravitation
  • Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
  • Browse content in Psychology
  • Affective Sciences
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Criminal and Forensic Psychology
  • Developmental Psychology
  • Educational Psychology
  • Evolutionary Psychology
  • Health Psychology
  • History and Systems in Psychology
  • Music Psychology
  • Neuropsychology
  • Organizational Psychology
  • Psychological Assessment and Testing
  • Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
  • Psychology Professional Development and Training
  • Research Methods in Psychology
  • Social Psychology
  • Browse content in Social Sciences
  • Browse content in Anthropology
  • Anthropology of Religion
  • Human Evolution
  • Medical Anthropology
  • Physical Anthropology
  • Regional Anthropology
  • Social and Cultural Anthropology
  • Theory and Practice of Anthropology
  • Browse content in Business and Management
  • Business History
  • Business Strategy
  • Business Ethics
  • Business and Government
  • Business and Technology
  • Business and the Environment
  • Comparative Management
  • Corporate Governance
  • Corporate Social Responsibility
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Health Management
  • Human Resource Management
  • Industrial and Employment Relations
  • Industry Studies
  • Information and Communication Technologies
  • International Business
  • Knowledge Management
  • Management and Management Techniques
  • Operations Management
  • Organizational Theory and Behaviour
  • Pensions and Pension Management
  • Public and Nonprofit Management
  • Strategic Management
  • Supply Chain Management
  • Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
  • Criminal Justice
  • Criminology
  • Forms of Crime
  • International and Comparative Criminology
  • Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
  • Development Studies
  • Browse content in Economics
  • Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
  • Asian Economics
  • Behavioural Finance
  • Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
  • Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
  • Economic Methodology
  • Economic Systems
  • Economic History
  • Economic Development and Growth
  • Financial Markets
  • Financial Institutions and Services
  • General Economics and Teaching
  • Health, Education, and Welfare
  • History of Economic Thought
  • International Economics
  • Labour and Demographic Economics
  • Law and Economics
  • Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
  • Microeconomics
  • Public Economics
  • Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
  • Welfare Economics
  • Browse content in Education
  • Adult Education and Continuous Learning
  • Care and Counselling of Students
  • Early Childhood and Elementary Education
  • Educational Equipment and Technology
  • Educational Strategies and Policy
  • Higher and Further Education
  • Organization and Management of Education
  • Philosophy and Theory of Education
  • Schools Studies
  • Secondary Education
  • Teaching of a Specific Subject
  • Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
  • Teaching Skills and Techniques
  • Browse content in Environment
  • Applied Ecology (Social Science)
  • Climate Change
  • Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
  • Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
  • Natural Disasters (Environment)
  • Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
  • Browse content in Human Geography
  • Cultural Geography
  • Economic Geography
  • Political Geography
  • Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
  • Communication Studies
  • Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
  • Browse content in Politics
  • African Politics
  • Asian Politics
  • Chinese Politics
  • Comparative Politics
  • Conflict Politics
  • Elections and Electoral Studies
  • Environmental Politics
  • European Union
  • Foreign Policy
  • Gender and Politics
  • Human Rights and Politics
  • Indian Politics
  • International Relations
  • International Organization (Politics)
  • International Political Economy
  • Irish Politics
  • Latin American Politics
  • Middle Eastern Politics
  • Political Theory
  • Political Methodology
  • Political Communication
  • Political Philosophy
  • Political Sociology
  • Political Behaviour
  • Political Economy
  • Political Institutions
  • Politics and Law
  • Public Administration
  • Public Policy
  • Quantitative Political Methodology
  • Regional Political Studies
  • Russian Politics
  • Security Studies
  • State and Local Government
  • UK Politics
  • US Politics
  • Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
  • African Studies
  • Asian Studies
  • East Asian Studies
  • Japanese Studies
  • Latin American Studies
  • Middle Eastern Studies
  • Native American Studies
  • Scottish Studies
  • Browse content in Research and Information
  • Research Methods
  • Browse content in Social Work
  • Addictions and Substance Misuse
  • Adoption and Fostering
  • Care of the Elderly
  • Child and Adolescent Social Work
  • Couple and Family Social Work
  • Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
  • Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
  • Emergency Services
  • Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
  • International and Global Issues in Social Work
  • Mental and Behavioural Health
  • Social Justice and Human Rights
  • Social Policy and Advocacy
  • Social Work and Crime and Justice
  • Social Work Macro Practice
  • Social Work Practice Settings
  • Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
  • Welfare and Benefit Systems
  • Browse content in Sociology
  • Childhood Studies
  • Community Development
  • Comparative and Historical Sociology
  • Economic Sociology
  • Gender and Sexuality
  • Gerontology and Ageing
  • Health, Illness, and Medicine
  • Marriage and the Family
  • Migration Studies
  • Occupations, Professions, and Work
  • Organizations
  • Population and Demography
  • Race and Ethnicity
  • Social Theory
  • Social Movements and Social Change
  • Social Research and Statistics
  • Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
  • Sociology of Religion
  • Sociology of Education
  • Sport and Leisure
  • Urban and Rural Studies
  • Browse content in Warfare and Defence
  • Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
  • Land Forces and Warfare
  • Military Administration
  • Military Life and Institutions
  • Naval Forces and Warfare
  • Other Warfare and Defence Issues
  • Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
  • Weapons and Equipment

EC Law In Judicial Review

  • < Previous chapter
  • Next chapter >

8 Legitimate Expectations

  • Published: January 2007
  • Cite Icon Cite
  • Permissions Icon Permissions

Legitimate expectations is well known as a doctrine of public law in both domestic and HRA law. It is, nonetheless, a distinctive general principle of EC law. As such, the Administrative Court is bound to observe the EC general principle of legitimate expectations, as articulated by the ECJ, in its discrete form. Precisely because it has the same name and essentially similar content to its domestic counterpart, care is needed on the part of those conducting and determining judicial review and other domestic proceedings in which public law issues arise to ensure that the separate EC dimension of the legitimate expectations doctrine is preserved in a case falling within the scope of EC law.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

  • Google Scholar Indexing
  • GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]

Personal account

  • Sign in with email/username & password
  • Get email alerts
  • Save searches
  • Purchase content
  • Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

  • Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
  • Institutional account management
  • Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

  • Click Sign in through your institution.
  • Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
  • When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
  • Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

  • Click Sign in through society site.
  • When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

  • View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
  • View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

  • About Oxford Academic
  • Publish journals with us
  • University press partners
  • What we publish
  • New features  
  • Open access
  • Rights and permissions
  • Accessibility
  • Advertising
  • Media enquiries
  • Oxford University Press
  • Oxford Languages
  • University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • Cookie settings
  • Cookie policy
  • Privacy policy
  • Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

legitimate expectation judicial review essay

  • +8801712620018 Call Us For Free Consultation

Home » Law and Ethics » LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION

LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION

The doctrine of legitimate expectation was first developed in English law as a ground of judicial review in administrative law to protect a procedural or substantive interest when a public authority rescinds from a representation made to a person. It is based on the principles of natural justice and fairness, and seeks to prevent authorities from abusing power.

The courts of the United Kingdom have recognized both procedural and substantive legitimate expectations. A procedural legitimate expectation rests on the presumption that a public authority will follow a certain procedure in advance of a decision being taken, while a substantive legitimate expectation arises where an authority makes a lawful representation that an individual will receive or continue to receive some kind of substantive benefit. In determining a claim for an alleged breach of a legitimate expectation, a court will deliberate over three key considerations:

  • whether a legitimate expectation has arisen;
  • whether it would be unlawful for the authority to frustrate such an expectation; and
  • if it is found that the authority has done so, what remedies are available to the aggrieved person.

Procedural legitimate expectations have been recognized in a number of common law jurisdictions. In contrast, notwithstanding their acceptance and protection in the UK, substantive legitimate expectations have not been universally recognized. For instance, they have been given effect in Singapore but not in Australia.

The Coughlan case is a leading decision with respect to the issue of ‘substantive legitimate expectations’ and the purpose of this paper is to critically evaluate the arguments in favour of, as well as against, the judgments in the instant case. Upon engaging with the relevant criticisms and evaluations of the decision, it is submitted in this paper that the decision in Coughlan was correct.

Prior to Coughlan, it was unclear “whether substantive legitimate expectations were recognised within UK law”. In order to understand the issues surrounding legitimate expectations, it is instructive for the purposes of this essay to briefly review the facts of the case. The claimant, Miss Coughlan, was a quadriplegic who lived in a hospital for the chronically disabled from 1971-1993 called Newcourt hospital. Newcourt hospital was deemed to be unacceptable for modern care and as a result, she was moved to a new, purpose built facility in 1993 called Mardon House that was specifically designed to accommodate severely disabled patients. Miss Coughlan and other residents in the new facility were given an explicit “promise that they could live there ‘for as long as they chose’ whereby it would be their “home for life”. Although there were other grounds of challenging the legality of the health authority’s decision in the closure of a long-term care facility specifically designed for the purposes of severely disabled patients, the evaluation in Coughlan primarily hinged upon the Health authority’s promise in providing a ‘home for life’ to the claimant.

However, in 1998, the Health Authority in charge of the new residence decided to close the facility on the grounds that the unit was “prohibitively expensive” and not “financially viable” because it “left fewer resources for other services”. As a result, the health authority decided to transfer Miss Coughlan and the other residents to a home run by the local authority that was not purposely built for their care, unlike Mardon House. Miss Coughlan applied for judicial review on the basis that by closing the new facility, the health authority conducted its affairs unlawfully “in breaking the recent and unequivocal promise given by it that the applicant and other patients could live there for as long as they chose”. In other words, Coughlan had a ‘legitimate expectation’ that she would be able to remain at Mardon House as long as she chose to, but the court’s held that the health authority’s breach of that expectation unfairly amounted to a significant abuse of power and consequently ruled in favour of the applicant.

The Reasoning Employed In Coughlan

In Coughlan, the court recognised three scenarios of reviewing cases relating to legitimate expectations whereby a member of the public expects to be treated one way by a public body, but is treated in a way that is contrary to their expectations. Here, the court began its analysis by exploring the precise examination of the nature and/or circumstances in which the promise was being made.

The first scenario is that the court could conclude that the public authority is only required to uphold its previous representation if it has carefully and reasonably exhausted all of the available options available to it at the time before deciding to resile from its initial promise. Here, the decision is reviewed on Wednesbury grounds and Hargreaves is cited as an example of this type of case. This scenario applies the test of “rationality and whether the public body has given proper weight to the implications of not fulfilling the promise”.

The second scenario is that the court could “decide that the promise…induces a legitimate expectation of (for example) being consulted before a particular decision is taken”. Here, the courts will require that there is an opportunity for consultation before a decision is to be provided unless there is a prevailing reason to detract from that promise. In this instance, the court would determine whether such a breach was procedurally fair.

Finally, the third scenario is that the court could explore whether a lawful promise has induced a legitimate expectation of substantive benefit to the claimant. Here, the court will have to determine whether such a decision to breach a promise was so grossly “unfair that to take a new and different course will amount to an abuse of power”. Additionally, the court must decide if there was “a sufficient overriding interest to justify a departure from what has been previously promised”.

Coughlan is a seminal judgment concerning the issue of substantive legitimate expectations and it was held that the instant case fell within the third category, despite the controversy surrounding the court’s role of intervening in such cases. The courts reasons for placing Coughlan in the third category is because of (1) “the importance of what was promised to” the claimant, (2) “the fact that the promise was limited to a few individuals” and (3) because the consequences to the health authority of requiring it to honour its promise” were merely financial.

The courts held in favour of the applicant in Coughlan on the grounds of Preston, which suggests that it is an abuse of power if an authority reneges on its promise towards a limited number of individuals without justification. Furthermore, Coughlan acknowledged that the proper test was located in Unilever where the courts in that case concluded that “for the crown to enforce a time limit which for years it had not insisted upon would be so unfair as to amount to an abuse of power”. However, it is important to highlight that the judiciary in Coughlan rejected the Wednesbury test as the grounds for reviewing substantive legitimate expectation cases because it would not be conducive to striking the appropriate balance between the aims and priorities of the administration whilst simultaneously upholding the principle of fairness towards the claimant. Finally, Coughlan held that there was no overriding interest in frustrating the claimant’s expectations of remaining at Mardon House for the rest of her life because the health authority “failed to weigh the competing interests correctly” and does not appear to have made an offer of suitable, alternative accommodation. However, recent commentators have both criticised and affirmed the landmark judgment in Coughlan, and it is to this subject that we now turn.

Concerns With Coughlan

Elliot argues that the conclusions in Coughlan are unsupported by authority and inconsistently developed within the broader framework of English administrative law. As mentioned earlier, Coughlan rejected the Wednesbury test of rationality as the grounds for review and appears to be in favour of an approach that is far more sympathetic to ‘substantive protection’. However, in doing so, Elliot contends that the foundations of the judicial decisions are on dubious grounds because there is (1) “no clear guidance as to when such protection should be afforded” and (2) the reasoning outlined in Coughlan fails to sketch the times in which the courts ought to intervene where a “departure from previous policy is not…objectively justified”, or when a departure from policy is irrational.

To substantiate this argument, Elliot underscores the idea that the courts are better equipped to make their legal decisions on procedural, as opposed to substantive dimensions of executive decisions in its use of the Wednesbury test. For example, he refers to the Wednesbury test and its influence upon human rights cases. Here, Elliot maintains that the Wednesbury test is the underlying ‘organising principle’ in the sense that it is the cornerstone of adjudication and refers to the LJ Brown’s judgment in ex p Smith whereby the courts had to examine the legitimacy of the armed forces’ policy of excluding homosexuals from service:

on the conventional Wednesbury basis adapted to a human rights context and ask: can the Secretary of State show an important competing public interest which he could reasonably judge sufficient to justify the restriction [of the applicant’s rights]? The primary judgment is for him. Only if his purported justification outrageously defies logic or accepted moral standards can the court, exercising its secondary judgment, properly strike it down.

Consequently, Elliot insists that the decision in Coughlan and its ‘intrusive mode of review’ of cases involving substantive expectations is incompatible with the decision in Smith and Hargreaves, thus casting its appropriateness into serious doubt because of its failure to acknowledge how the Wednesbury test of unreasonableness restricts the courts adjudication of executive decisions. This position is consistent with the point in Barak-Erez’ article which highlights that the primary contention “against the doctrine of legitimate expectations in administrative law is that it clashes with the aim of securing administrative freedom of discretion”. In other words, it represents an affront to the ‘autonomy of executive bodies’. Conversely, in another article, Elliot notes that Coughlan appears to be more representative of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights than with the principled and established Wednesbury test in English law.

In this connection, Clayton asserts that the decision in Coughlan further complicated the scope of substantive, legitimate expectations. He argues that the Court’s decision in Coughlan obfuscated the ambit of substantive legitimate expectations and consequently extended the principle beyond its appropriate boundaries. Clayton also highlights that substantive expectations generated as a result of representations and/or promises from a public body ought to be distinguished from policy based expectations; consequently, he contends that “policy based expectations are more satisfactorily analysed as illustrations of the principle of consistency rather than the principle of substantive legitimate expectations”. In other words, he maintains that it is difficult to defend departures from policy-based expectations—in favour of substantive expectations towards particular individuals—because they form the basis of a consistent, principled approach to good administration. Additionally, Clayton also directs his critique towards the reasoning affirmed in Coughlan by suggesting that its employment of the legal principle that it is an abuse of power if an authority reneges on its promise towards a limited number of individuals is an uncertain measurement.

Thus, he suggests that the principle of consistency ought to be applied whereby public authorities adhere to their policies—and that inconsistency—ought to be perceived as a dimension of Wednesbury unreasonableness. He cites Hoffman’s observations in Matadeen v. Pointu as the rationale for his argument:

Equality before the law requires that people should be uniformly treated, unless there is some valid reason to treat them differently… Their Lordships do not doubt that such a principle is one of the building blocks of democracy and necessarily permeates any democratic constitution…[T]reating like cases alike and unlike cases differently is a general axiom of rational behaviour.

While there are merits to both Elliot and Clayton’s approaches, it is submitted in this paper that the Coughlan decision was indeed the correct approach—and we explore this in the section below.

In Favour Of Coughlan?

The problem of Elliot and Clayton’s argument is that the reasonableness doctrine appears to overshadow what seems to be a competing value of fairness. However, it is submitted in this paper that the two values need not be mutually exclusive. The decision of Coughlan and its affirmation of substantive legitimate expectations illustrate the court’s awareness of the tension between prizing administrative freedom on the one hand and fairness on the other, while recognising that neither perspective should triumph over one another. Although it could be argued that the principle of ‘substantive legitimate expectation’ did indeed triumph over the Wednesbury test—as Elliot and Clayton seem to suggest—the particular facts of the Coughlan case indicates that the courts attempted to strike the appropriate balance in reconciling the two doctrines. Additionally, Roberts points out that Coughlan does not simply recommend that an expectation driven by policy considerations should be overruled; rather, these considerations ought to be balanced with an evaluation of “whether there is a sufficient overriding public interest to justify departing from the original policy in respect of the applicant”.

Schonberg and Craig highlight four propositions acknowledging that Coughlan did not depart from established principle and was therefore justified. First, they note that the courts were aware of the fact that they could not substitute their judgment in regards to “how discretion ought to have been exercised” by the executive authority in substantive review cases. Second, the courts recognised its role of intervention could be legitimated in evaluating whether the purposes of fair-decision making on the administrations’ behalf were being complied with. Third, Schonberg and Craig affirm Elliot’s contention that the Wednesbury reasonableness test is of crucial importance regarding an evaluation of the executive branches’ decisions. However, they nuance this argument by highlighting that the decision in Coughlan also affirms, “that there should be some control in terms of rationality” in the sense that the test ought not be severely restrictive, but viewed with a positive bent as noted by Cooke LJ where he asks whether “the decision in question was one which a reasonable authority could reach?” Finally, Schonberg and Craig underscore that the varied application of the Wednesbury test in fundamental rights cases supports the notion that the criterion for evaluation ought to be delineated in compliance with the character of the interest in the case. Thus, they conclude that

The general judicial approach is to consider whether a reasonable minister could reasonably make the contested decision on the material at hand: the more substantial the interference with rights, the more the court requires by way of justification.

Furthermore, Schonberg and Craig provide a convincing analysis of the importance of substantive legitimate expectations as a principle of law and suggest that four considerations ought to be at the forefront of determining whether an appropriate standard of review is being exercised: (1) a public body may lead an individual to experience severe hardship if it acts in a manner that is contrary to what the individual may have been led to expect; thus, the law ought to protect an individual’s interests if they are led to rely upon an expectation to his/her detriment; (2), “protection of legitimate expectations is closely linked with the rule of law” (3) “a lack of respect for individual expectations may undermine trust in public authorities”, and (4)“public authorities must comply with the general principles of EU law, including that of legitimate expectations, in situations which fall within the scope of Community law”. Additionally, Schonberg and Craig also propose that the ‘proportionality test’ would be an appropriate mechanism in refining the judicial approach to substantive, legitimate expectations. It is submitted that these considerations provide a helpful criterion towards balancing the importance of upholding the principles of Wednesbury unreasonableness and administrative discretion with the protection of substantive, legitimate expectations.

Although this paper affirms that the decision in Coughlan ought to be hailed as a positive development in the law, it is evident that there are numerous conflicting perspectives on the appropriate balance between administrative discretion and the expectations of individuals relying on executive assurances. However, as the development of the principle of substantive legitimate expectations expands incrementally, it will be interesting to observe how the courts will approach future cases in light of the arguments concerning consistency and fidelity to the principle of Wednesbury unreasonableness advanced by Elliot and Clayton, as well as the proposals of proportionality issued by Schonberg and Craig.

Bibliography

  • Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service. [1985] AC 374.
  • R v Chief Constable of Sussex. Ex p. International Trader’s Ferry Ltd. [1999] 2 AC 418
  • R v. Home Secretary Ex p. Khan. [1984] 1 WLR 1337.
  • R v. Home Secretary Ex p. Hargreaves. [1997] 1 WLR 906.
  • R v. Inland Revenue Commissioners Ex p. MFK Underwriting Agencies Ltd. [1990] 1 LR 1545.
  • R v. Inland Revenue Commissioners Ex p. Preston. [1985] AC 835.
  • R v. Inland Revenue Commissioners Ex p. Unilever Plc. [1996] STC 681.
  • R v. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Ex p. Hamble (Offshore) Fisheries Ltd. [1995] 2 All ER 714
  • R v. North and East Devon Health Authority Ex p. Coughlan. [2001] QB 213
  • R v. Secretary of State for Education and Employment, ex p. Begbie [2000] 1 WLR 1115
  • R v. Secretary of State for Transport, Ex p. Richmond upon Thames London BC. [1994] 1 All ER 577.

Articles & Books

  • Barak-Erez, D. “The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations and the Distinction between the Reliance and Expectation Interests”. European Public Law. Vol. 11, no. 4 (2005). P. 583-601.
  • Clayton, R. “Legitimate Expectations, Policy, and the Principle of Consistency”. Cambridge Law Journal. Vol 62, no. 1 (2003). P. 93-105.
  • Craig, P.P. Administrative Law. (5th ed). London: Sweet and Maxwell, 2003.
  • Elliot, M. “Legitimate Expectation: The Substantive Dimension”. Cambridge Law Journal. Vol. 59, no. 3 (2000). P. 421-425.
  • Elliot, M. “Coughlan: Substantive Protection of Legitimate Expectations Revisited”. Judicial Review. Vol. 5, no. 1 (2000). P. 27-32.
  • Roberts, M. “Public Law Representations and Substantive Legitimate Expectations”. Modern Law Review. Vol. 64, no. 1 (2001). P. 112-122.
  • Schonberg, S., and Craig, P. “Substantive Legitimate Expectations after Coughlan”. Public Law. (Winter 2000). P. 684-701.
  • Steele, I. “Substantive Legitimate Expectations: Striking the Right Balance?” Law Quarterly Review. Vol. 121 (April 2005). P. 300-328.

Disclaimer:

The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. This site may be used by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all over the world. Researchers all over the world have the access to upload their writes up in this site. In consideration of the people’s participation in the Web Page, the individual, group, organization, business, spectator, or other, does hereby release and forever discharge the Lawyers & Jurists, and its officers, board, and employees, jointly and severally from any and all actions, causes of actions, claims and demands for, upon or by reason of any damage, loss or injury, which hereafter may be sustained by participating their work in the Web Page. This release extends and applies to, and also covers and includes, all unknown, unforeseen, unanticipated and unsuspected injuries, damages, loss and liability and the consequences thereof, as well as those now disclosed and known to exist.  The provisions of any state’s law providing substance that releases shall not extend to claims, demands, injuries, or damages which are known or unsuspected to exist at this time, to the person executing such release, are hereby expressly waived. However the Lawyers & Jurists makes no warranty expressed or implied or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product process or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favouring by the Lawyers & Jurists. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the Web site do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Lawyers & Jurists. Above all, if there is any complaint drop by any independent user to the admin for any contents of this site, the Lawyers & Jurists would remove this immediately from its site.

Latest Articles

The intersection of technology and legal rights.

Apr 21, 2024 .

FAMILY LAW AND ITS EFFECTS ON PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS

Impact of environmental regulations on daily life, the influence of employment law on workplace dynamics, role of consumer protection laws in daily transactions, impact of traffic laws on daily commuting, law frim in bangladesh.

The Lawyers & Jurists is a multi- functional & ultimate- solution driven Law firm in Bangladesh sited in the heart of the country’s capital. It is one of the top-ranked law firm in Bangladesh . It has a great reputation in the legal sector. Besides that, we have lawyers from top law schools who have extensive experience in international as well as local legal affairs. Moreover, it formed of associates with brilliant backgrounds in corporate, commercial, criminal & banking law. It is one of the very few law firm in Dhaka Bangladesh with a good track record of involvement in significant legal disputes and transactions...

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

  • We're Hiring!
  • Help Center

paper cover thumbnail

THE DOCTRINE OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS IN KENYAN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Profile image of George Wanyama

Article 47 of the Constitution of Kenya makes the doctrine of legitimate expectations a constitutional issue rather than a creature of the common law applicable in Kenya. The implication of this fact needs a new understanding in light of its potential impact on how discretionary power by public and private entities may be exercised.

Related Papers

EXECUTIVES’ GUIDE ON APPLICATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION AS A GROUND FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

Siranjana Rodrigo

Public authorities are to maintain assurance of their acts, thereby preserve the reasonable expectation of the people. Such assurance has given the natal to the doctrine of ‘Legitimate Expectation’. Therefore, the legitimate expectation of the individual towards the decisions of the public authorities has been engineered prior to the conduct of them which creates and enhances uniformity and certainty of their decisions. Accordingly, people have faith in Legal certainty as a basic tenant of the rule of law and they plan their lives and get the knowledge about the legal consequences of their actions. Further, good administration system requires to uphold its promises made by expression or practice and protect the justice in the case of violation of such legal right and liberty and interest of the people. Legitimate Expectation arises when administrative authorities exercising certain policies, practices, and exercising of its discretionary power. According to Wade & Frosty, aggravated parties have the right to seek legitimately expected benefits by placing trust in the promises of the official that were violated or denied. Therefore, it is unfair to dash or deny legitimate expectations of the aggrieved parties without granting them an opportunity of representation and to convey authority why desecration should be fulfilled their expectation. Therefore, public authorities and decision-makers must be aware to protect the legitimate expectations of the people as it is a mature tool to decide fair exercising of discretion power of the public authority at the court of law.

legitimate expectation judicial review essay

Patrick Kilonzo

Administrative law, though law is different from other branches of law as some times it goes beyond the law to examine administrative circulars, policy statements, memoranda and resolution. It is a branch of pulblic law, it deals with the relationship between individuals and gvt. It deals with organisation and power of administrative and quasi administrative bodies with emphasis on the manner of exercise of the power. • Administrative law is primarily concerned with official action. • It relies greatly on the common law. • It is cross-cutting and will arise wherever a person becomes a victim of arbitrary exercise of public power. HISTORICAL DVLPT OF AL AL as practiced in Kenya has its origin in the laws of England. As a modern concept in England, Al began to emerge in the second half of the 17th century. However a number of the principles like natural justice pre-date this time. In earlier times in England justices of peace served as all purpose administrative authorities. They were supervised by judges of assize who conveyed instructions from the crown during their circuits and also dealt with defaults and malpractices. This system was strengthened under the Tudor mornachy through the use of the privy council and the provincial councils in the north and in Wales which was a drift towards centralisation of power. Oversight by the privy council was exercised through the star chamber which punished those who disobeyed the justices of peaceand reprimanded the justices themselves. After abolishion of the star chamber in 1642, and the destruction of most of the privy council executive power a new situation arose. The old machinery of central political control had been broken down therefore the court of kings bench stepped in and this ushered in a new era of control of administrative authority through courts of law. The kings bench issued its writs of Mandamus, Certiorari and prohibition together with ordinary damages to anyone who wished to dispute the legality of administrative acts of justices or other public authorities. The courts extended the application of the principle of ultra-vires and judicial preview. Later the same rules were applied to the administrative state and it began to emerge to regulate the central government. In kenya, the constitution now guarantees the right to fair administrative action as part of rights and fundamental freedoms under the bill of rights. Art 47 provides: a. Every person has the right to administartive action that is expenditious, efficient, lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. b. If a right of fundamental freedom of a person has been or is likely to be adversely affected by administrative action the person has the right to be given written reasons for the action. c. Parliament shall enact legislation to give effect to the rights in cross 1 and the legislation shall: I. Review of admistrative action by a court of law or an independent tribunal II. Promote efficient administration In Kenya, the development of modern administrative law can be traced back to the advent of colonisation, Kenya was declared a British protectorate in 1895 and this was the start of deportation of British systems of governance including its systems of public administration.

John Gichuhi

Farrah Ahmed , Adam Perry

The doctrine of legitimate expectations is a developing area of administrative law, and many issues remain outstanding. Promises, practices, and policies generate legitimate expectations, but what is special about them? Why do they and only they generate legitimate expectations? The lack of an obvious answer has led some commentators to claim that the doctrine is ultimately incoherent and should be disaggregated. In this paper, we challenge this claim by arguing, first, that promises, practices, and policies each comprise or make applicable a certain type of rule, and second, that having a legitimate expectation is a matter of such a rule binding a public body to act in some way. This rule-based account gives the doctrine of legitimate expectations both coherence and distinctiveness.

karel gaeb , Joas Kamudulunge

Most legal systems are currently facing many administrative law challenges...

karim maged

Royal Institute of Colombo Law Journal 2021 - Volume II.

Shane Foster

Legitimate Expectation, as a ground of Judicial Review of government actions, has become an extremely popular choice for an overwhelming number of litigants who wish to pursue a remedy through the Writ Jurisdiction vested in the Court of Appeal by Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. Scores of those applications have been rejected by the Honourable Court of Appeal because the applications themselves are misconceived in law and in fact. This article, therefore, aims to clarify the intricacies of the principle of Legitimate Expectation considering the recent Judgment of the Honourable Court of Appeal and those treatises of eminent Jurists that have become synonymous with Administrative Law. It aims to provide a general overview of the substantive and procedural aspects of the principle of Legitimate Expectation. The article will also provide a brief overview of the case law in relation to those aspects. It will traverse, in brief, the doctrinal connections of those above-mentioned aspects to the demands of Natural Justice and the Doctrine of Estoppel. An application to the Honourable Court of Appeal based on a legitimate expectation per se is notoriously difficult to succeed and hence, ancillary issues that may be taken cognizance of by the Honourable Court of Appeal before an application of that nature is allowed and a writ is issued in the favour of the Petitioner by the said Honourable Court is also traversed in brief. The article, finally, also poses a proposal pertaining to how the doctrine may be used to ensure good governance in Sri Lanka. The authors welcome any feedback that may emanate from a reading of the article.

Toby McKinnon

qaisar abbas

Melanie Murcott

Prior to KwaZulu-Natal Joint Liaison Committee v MEC for Education, Kwazulu-Natal (KZN JLC) commentators and the courts were in agreement that "the way has been left open" for the development of the doctrine of substantive legitimate expectation in South African law, so that a court could, in the future, afford an expectant party’s substantive legitimate expectation (i.e. the expectation of a particular outcome) substantive – as opposed to mere procedural – protection. In KZN JLC the opportunity arose to develop a doctrine of substantive legitimate expectation, but the Constitutional Court declined to do so. Instead, a new legal mechanism was created to enforce a "unilateral publicly promulgated promise by government to pay". In this paper I briefly discuss the development of the doctrine of legitimate expectation in South African law, which left the way open for the Constitutional Court to develop a doctrine of substantive legitimate expectation in KZN JLC. I address the court’s refusal to develop the doctrine, and analyse the creative approach adopted in KZN JLC in respect of the enforcement of a unilateral and publicly promulgated promise by government to pay, from the perspective of whether this creative approach amounted to the invocation of the doctrine by another name. I then consider the implications of KZN JLC for the development of the doctrine of substantive legitimate expectation in future. Finally I discuss how the creation of a new legal mechanism to enforce publicly promulgated promises to pay is "subversive of PAJA and the scheme in s 33 of the Constitution".

RELATED PAPERS

Zulio Karim Alfandi

Ari Santoso

Adrian Hamlyn

ACM SIGGRAPH 2013 Art Gallery on - SIGGRAPH '13

William Latham

Biological Psychiatry

Abraham Weizman

Luciana Gonçalves

Journal of the College …

Ayaz Ahmad Shaikh

Wolfgang Schild

Revista de investigación

Jesus Aranguren

The American journal of cardiology

Sanjay Prasad

International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences

richa bharti

Giovanni De Feo

Koshka Duff

Jurnal Kebidanan Indonesia

INTAN MAHARANI PUTRI

Frontiers in Genetics

Agustín Barría

Nature Chemical Biology

Karin Ernits

Educação &amp; Sociedade

GRAZIELA PEROSA

Vibroengineering PROCEDIA

Volodymyr Gurey

Journal of Computing and Natural Science

Prameetha Pai

Um sonho fantástico

Marcelo Amorim Checchia

Clinical lymphoma & myeloma

Shao-Jung Li

Guilherme Esmeraldo

Sven Van Kerckhoven

The Journal of Nutrition

Claudia Valeggia

The Counseling Psychologist

Shudarshana Gupta

RELATED TOPICS

  •   We're Hiring!
  •   Help Center
  • Find new research papers in:
  • Health Sciences
  • Earth Sciences
  • Cognitive Science
  • Mathematics
  • Computer Science
  • Academia ©2024

COMMENTS

  1. Legitimate expectation as a ground for judicial review

    Legitimate expectation as a ground for judicial review. 16 Jun 2017, 4:18 pm. ANALYSIS: A number of recent judicial decisions - particularly a recent ruling by the UK's top judges in the United Policyholders case - have gone some way towards clarifying what counts as a breach of 'legitimate expectation' by a public body. The law of legitimate ...

  2. Stuck at A Crossroad? Substantive Legitimate Expectations in English

    III. The Core Case of Substantive Legitimate Expectations. The core case of substantive legitimate expectations stems from the third category of legitimate expectations set out in Coughlan.A core case has three components, relating to: (1) the nature of the representation; (2) the test used to assess whether a public body can resile from that representation; and (3) the burden of proof.

  3. Introduction

    Abstract. Section I tries to identify some of the hallmarks of legitimate expectations, as a general concept, and to say something as to how it might be contrasted from the concept of reasonable expectations. Section II outlines key features of the legal doctrine of legitimate expectations, including the ostensible purpose of the doctrine, the ...

  4. JUDICIAL REVIEW AND LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION

    Shane Foster. 2021, Royal Institute of Colombo Law Journal 2021 - Volume II. Legitimate Expectation, as a ground of Judicial Review of government actions, has become an extremely popular choice for an overwhelming number of litigants who wish to pursue a remedy through the Writ Jurisdiction vested in the Court of Appeal by Article 140 of the ...

  5. 6. Legitimate Expectations

    This chapter examines the doctrine of legitimate expectation and its application to lawfully created expectations as well as the extent, if any, to which it may protect 'unlawfully generated expectations'. It first explains why legitimate expectations must be protected and goes on to discuss the relationship between two variables that are in play in any situation which potentially engages ...

  6. Fairness and Legitimate Expectation in Judicial Review

    Digital access for individuals. £21.00. Fairness and Legitimate Expectation in Judicial Review - Volume 56 Issue 1.

  7. Grounds of Judicial Review Iii: Legitimate Expectation

    The doctrine of legitimate expectation is a recent development, even by fast moving public law standards. The term was first mentioned in an English case in 1969 (in Schmidt v Secretary of State for Home Affairs; it was an emergent doctrine in Continental legal systems and European Community law before then), but it was not until the early to mid 1980s that the doctrine had settled into ...

  8. (PDF) Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation: Origin, Development and

    Legitimate Expectation, as a ground of Judicial Review of government actions, has become an extremely popular choice for an overwhelming number of litigants who wish to pursue a remedy through the Writ Jurisdiction vested in the Court of Appeal by Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

  9. 8 Legitimate Expectation

    Abuse of power is a term found in some foundational cases on legitimate expectations. 33 However, abuse of power is probably better understood as an overarching principle of judicial review of administrative action in general, a 'rationale' rather than a rule, 34 which does not provide much in the way of concrete guidance to judges charged ...

  10. 13. Grounds for judicial review: procedural impropriety, natural

    This chapter also considers legitimate expectation as a ground for judicial review. ... diagram problem and essay answer plans, suggested answers, notes of caution, tips on obtaining extra marks, the key debates on each topic and suggestions on further reading. ... discusses the judicial review of procedural impropriety. It covers the rules of ...

  11. Legitimate Expectations

    Legitimate expectations is well known as a doctrine of public law in both domestic and HRA law. It is, nonetheless, a distinctive general principle of EC law. ... care is needed on the part of those conducting and determining judicial review and other domestic proceedings in which public law issues arise to ensure that the separate EC dimension ...

  12. LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION

    The doctrine of legitimate expectation was first developed in English law as a ground of judicial review in administrative law to protect a procedural or substantive interest when a public authority rescinds from a representation made to a person. ... it is instructive for the purposes of this essay to briefly review the facts of the case ...

  13. Do we need a theory of legitimate expectations?

    See also Elias, P ' Legitimate expectations and judicial review ' in Jowell, J and Oliver, D (eds) New Directions in Judicial Review ... 108 Oakeshott, M Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1991)Google Scholar. 109 109 Gee and Webber, above n 102.

  14. Legitimate expectation

    The doctrine of legitimate expectation was first developed in English law as a ground of judicial review in administrative law to protect a procedural or substantive interest when a public authority rescinds from a representation made to a person. It is based on the principles of natural justice and fairness, and seeks to prevent authorities from abusing power.

  15. Concept of Legitimate Expectation

    The Wednesbury test was rejected as a test for judicial review of legitimate expectation of this nature and the test of abuse of power was established. [ 19 ] According to the Court of Appeal, "[The Courts task] is then limited to asking whether the application of the policy to an individual who has been lead to expect something different is ...

  16. Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation: An Analysis

    The doctrine of legitimate expectation is one such measure used for judicial review in administrative law. This report analyses the significance, characteristics, requirements and types of ...

  17. (PDF) The Scope of the Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation as a Ground

    This paper is concerned with how we ought to think about legitimate expectations in the non-ideal, 'real' world. In one (dominant) strand of contemporary theories of justice, justice requires not that each gets what she deserves, but that each gets that to which she is entitled in accordance with what Rawls calls 'the public rules that specify the scheme of cooperation'.

  18. Theory of Legitimate Expectation

    The theory of Legitimate Expectation is one of the core branches of Administrative Law. Its origin was very recent and was adapted to a long list of the concepts which are fashioned by the courts for the review of administrative actions. Now in some of the courts around the world it has very easily accepted such as English, Irish and Indian ...

  19. Essay 3- legitimate expectations and grounds for judicial review

    Where claimants have failed to comply with the time limit, courts have discretion to allow the case to continue in spite of this provided that there is a "good reason" for doing so (Pt 3, r1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules) - for example, a claimant who tries to exhaust other remedies before seeking judicial review. Legitimate ...

  20. Substantive Legitimate Expectations

    In order to understand the issues surrounding legitimate expectations, it is instructive for the purposes of this essay to briefly review the facts of the case. The claimant, Miss Coughlan, was a quadriplegic who lived in a hospital for the chronically disabled from 1971-1993 called Newcourt hospital. ... Steyn, K. "Substantive Legitimate ...

  21. PDF Administrative law: Doctrine of necessity, doctrine of legitimate

    expectation should be legitimate, that is, reasonable, logical and valid. Any expectation which is based on sporadic or casual or random acts, or which is unreasonable, illogical or invalid cannot be a legitimate expectation. Not being a right, it is not enforceable as such. It is a concept fashioned by courts, for judicial review of ...

  22. The doctrine of Legitimate expectations As a ground of judicial review

    Helwan university Faculty of law Legal English studies program The doctrine of Legitimate expectations As a ground of judicial review Prepared by Karim Maged Gerges A student at school of law Legal English studies program Helwan university - Egypt [Type here] 1.Introduction 1.1 Importance of judicial review: in Egypt, judicial review is very important in public law field.

  23. The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations in Kenyan Administrative Law

    Judge Murithii, in a subsequent case, R v County Govt of Mombasa ex Parte Outdoor Advertising Ass. of Kenya [2014] eKLR reasoned that because judicial review is a human rights remedy, damages may get awarded to a plaintiff who successfully argues a breach of their legitimate expectations by a public or private actor vested with discretionary power.