Mindful of the threat of a terrorist attack during the Olympics, the British authorities have developed an Air Security Plan. One element of the plan is to install missiles on the roof of a residential apartment tower in Leytonstone. Unsurprisingly, the residents were upset. They went, unsuccessfully, to the High Court to judicially review the […] Read more

One of the drivers of the development and application of doctrine in administrative law is the concept of the principles of good administration. On one view, courts and administrators work collaboratively to produce rational and efficient policies and decisions.Fleshing out the principles of good administration is an interest of mine, so I was intrigued to […] Read more

The Supreme Court of the United States recently cast a critical eye over the concept of Auer deference (so called even though the seminal case is actually Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co.). When administrative bodies promulgate rules, regulations and policies to fill in the gaps in statutory provisions, their promulgations may themselves have […] Read more

Over the next couple of weeks, I am going to blog occasionally about my new book, A Theory of Deference in Administrative Law:Basis, Application and Scope. For my first post, I thought I would start with something that does not really appear in the book at all: a brief overview of the approach I urge. […] Read more

Unlike many (perhaps most?) other countries, Canada allows administrative bodies to make non-binding interpretations of constitutional provisions and to grant remedies for human rights violations by state actors.To put it in terms first suggested by the now-Chief Justice, the constitution is “not some holy grail which only judicial initiates of the superior courts may touch” […] Read more

A basic principle of administrative law is that a decision-maker must approach its decisions with an open mind. Demonstrating that a decision-maker had a “closed mind”, however, is extremely difficult. A decision-maker bent on refusing an application come what may will, if clever enough, keep his or her prejudices to him or herself.Interestingly, the applicant […] Read more

As a Q.C., Rabinder Singh appeared in some of the most significant public law cases before the superior courts of England and Wales. He was appointed to the bench in 2011. From the High Court, he recently issued an interesting judgment in H.A. (Nigeria) v. Home Secretary, [2012] EWHC 979 (Admin), a case concerning the […] Read more

Penn Law’s blog on regulation has published an interesting series of posts on Mitt Romney’s regulatory policy, collected here. Gold star to Ron Cass, who identifies the malleability of cost-benefit analysis and suggests: “presidential enthusiasm for or suspicion of regulation (or sensitivity to particular aspects of it) can significantly affect how administrative agencies go about […] Read more

I am off on what promises to be an electronics-free holiday until the start of July. On my return, I expect to have a look at the interesting decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Elgin v. Department of the Treasury, discussed here by Steve Vladeck. One of the issues there is […] Read more

Another example from the Canadian courts of the thin line separating process from substance: Turner v. Canada (Attorney General), 2012 FCA 159. On this occasion, the determination that a question went to process is again plausible at first sight but troubling on closer inspection. The applicant here alleged that he was discriminated against by the […] Read more