Judicial Attitudes to Judicial Review: A Comparative Examination of Justifications Offered for Restricting the Scope of Judicial Review in Australia, Canada and England

By Cassimatis, Anthony E. | Melbourne University Law Review, April 2010 | Go to article overview

Judicial Attitudes to Judicial Review: A Comparative Examination of Justifications Offered for Restricting the Scope of Judicial Review in Australia, Canada and England


Cassimatis, Anthony E., Melbourne University Law Review


[Legislative reform of judicial review in Canada and Australia has encountered unexpected difficulties. Judicial attitudes appear to have been a factor in this. These attitudes, however, defy simple, classification according to realist, functional or 'green light' critiques of judicial values. The history of legislative reform in Ontario and Australia appears far more complex. Other factors. particularly the precision (or otherwise) of the drafting of the legislative provisions, appear far more significant. Experiences in both Ontario and Australia also point to the continuing vitality of the traditional common law and equitable remedies. Judicial attitudes to judicial review appear to be an important source of this continuing vitality.]

CONTENTS
I   Introduction
    II Statutory Reform of Judicial Review in Canada and Australia
       A Ontario
       B Australia
       C Case Study: Judicial Review of Government Tendering Decisions
       D Concluding Observations on the Interpretation of the ADJR Act
         and Related Legislation
         1 Broader Policy Issues
         2 Practical Considerations Arising from the Drafting of the
           ADJR Act
III Judicial Attitudes to Declaratory Relief--Australia and England
IV  Conclusions

I INTRODUCTION

Referring to academic commentary (1) on statutory reforms to judicial review remedies in Ontario in the 1970s, Professor Carol Harlow noted an apparent

   tendency to revert to the legalistic practice of deciding cases
   with important implications for the substantive law of judicial
   review, on technical, procedural points. The effect has been that
   an Act [Ontario's Judicial Review Procedure Act, SO 1971, c 48]
   intended for the simplification of administrative law procedures
   has been used to restrict and complicate the law of judicial review
   ... (2)

Contrast this assessment of the effectiveness of attempted statutory reforms to judicial review in Canada with Professor Michael Taggart's recent assessment of the High Court of Australia's decision in Griffith University v Tang ('Tang'): (3)

   It beggars belief how a reform like the [Administrative Decisions
   (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth)] (and its State equivalents) which
   was intended 'to simplify and clarify the grounds and [the]
   remedies for judicial review, thereby facilitating access to the
   courts and enabling the individual to challenge administrative
   action which adversely affected his interests' can be interpreted
   to frustrate that intention in Tang. You now have back many of the
   evils these reforms were meant to eradicate! (4)

Even if one does not agree with every point of criticism offered by Professor Taggart, (5) I think it must be conceded that the High Court's interpretations of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) ('ADJR Act') and the Queensland Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld) (which was itself largely inspired by the Commonwealth Act) in cases such as Tang, NEAT Domestic Trading Pty Ltd v AWB Ltd ('NEAT') (6) and Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (7) stand in sharp contrast to the optimistic tone of the reports of the Kerr (8) and Ellicott (9) Committees that recommended the reforms to administrative law that these Acts were designed to implement.

Notwithstanding the negative assessment referred to by Professor Harlow, the legislation in Ontario is now counted as a successful exercise in reforming administrative law in Canada. (10) The restrictive position taken by judges in early cases addressing the scope and operation of Ontario's judicial review legislation has been reversed in subsequent cases. This article will examine possible reasons for the initially restrictive attitudes of judges in Ontario towards the statutory reforms in that Province and the subsequent change in approach, It will compare and contrast the possible reasons for restrictive interpretations given by the High Court of Australia to the Australian legislation. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Judicial Attitudes to Judicial Review: A Comparative Examination of Justifications Offered for Restricting the Scope of Judicial Review in Australia, Canada and England
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.