• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Administrative Law - Pedal power association v Sydney city council

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW TOPIC: ULTRA VIRES GROUP: AMANDA AND BEATA QUESTION: PEDAL POWER ASSOCIATION v SYDNEY CITY COUNCIL ADVICE TO PEDAL POWER ASSOCIATION Question (a) The nature of the Council's discretionary power and the doctrine of broad ultra vires The nature of the Council's discretionary power. In determining the nature of the Council's discretionary power, the threshold issue is whether the exercise of discretionary power achieved the purpose or object authorised by the legislation granting that power. The exercise of power for a purpose other than that conferred will be 'ultra vires'. Furthermore, extended ultra vires looks to the legality and appropriateness of the decision making process undertaken by the subject decision maker. Doctrine of broad ultra vires. Administrators have only such legal powers as are conferred upon them. These powers depend on whether the final decision is one, which was permitted by an enactment or (exceptionally) some other sources of power and also depend on whether the decision maker has complied with prescribed procedures. The rules, which comprise the 'legality principle', are the rules of broad/extended ultra vires. These rules are as follow: - * Decisions must be made in good faith and for proper purposes; * Only relevant considerations must be taken into account and irrelevant considerations must be ignored; * Decision makers must have some evidence on which to base ...read more.

Middle

It can be argued that the Council applied its policy inflexibly since the policy states that bicycles be banned from city streets except in special circumstances. A bicycle rally to advocate cycling as a form of transport could have been considered as a special circumstance. Furthermore, will regard to the preamble of the Sydney Roads Act 1979 (NSW), the Council may have adopted a strict interpretation for which its discretionary powers encompass, thereby inflexibly applying their discretion. Note that the preamble states that it is an Act "to adjust the competing rights to use public roads and to provide for the orderly flow of vehicular traffic...". It can be argued that the Council may have 'adjusted' the competing rights with a bias towards motor vehicles due to a strict interpretation of the meaning of 'vehicular traffic', thereby not exercising all of their discretion. Unreasonableness/Uncertainty Grounds: - In addition to refusing to exercise all of their discretion, there are also significant arguments which can be sustained to purport that the Council made a decision beyond their power. 1. Reasonableness The test for reasonableness was expounded in the leading case of Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 (known as the Wednesbury Test). ...read more.

Conclusion

Furthermore, the Council was not making a decision on the merits of the Pedal Power Association's application, rather it simply ruled them out of consideration altogether and made it illegal for that party to access their rights to public roads. No evidence. The ADJR Act lists the no evidence rule as a separate ground for challenge. A person may apply for an order for review where there was no evidence or other material to justify the making of decision (ss 5(1)(h), 6(1)(h)). This is qualified in ss 5(3) and 6(3) which specifies that the no evidence ground will not be made out unless: (a) the person who made the decision was required by law to reach the decision only if a particular matter was established, and there was no evidence or other material (including facts of which he/she was entitled to take notice) from which he/she could reasonably be satisfied that the matter was established; or (b) the person who made the decision based the decision on the existence of a particular fact, and that fact did not exist. In the instance of the Council, there is little to comment on the no evidence rule, with the exception that the Council may need to substantiate their decision and further explain what is meant by "commercial interests". 1 Amanda and Beata - Ultra Vires Chapter 7 Q2 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Sources of Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Sources of Law essays

  1. AS LAW - Judicial Precedent

    the Court of Appeal reverses a decision of the High Court. Following. Where a higher court agrees with the decision of the later court. House of Lords and Judicial Precedent. Until 1898 the House Of Lords had the power to overrule it's own previous decisions.

  2. Statutory Interpretation

    The mischief rule is similar to the purposive approach, so it is not an entirely alien concept for UK judges. This approach was formally acknowledged in Pepper v Hart (1992) which also indicated that Hansard, the record of debates in Parliament, can be consulted when a case is in court.

  1. Outline many of the basic elements of law that relate to business and marketing.

    * Prize advertisements must include odds of winning and likeliness of the particular prize being won within a certain time period. Advertising is defined in the Code as a 'plug' (information about a gambling provider's gambling products) broadcast on either television or radio, in exchange for payment or another form of valuable consideration (including an agreement to purchase advertising).

  2. Outcome (3): Analyse the provisions relating to the police powers of arrest, search, seizure, ...

    The force used whilst exercising such powers under PACE should be reasonable. Unreasonable force could cause injury to the suspect and raise many issues under article 2 and 3 of the Human Rights Act. As section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1687 states: ' a person must use such

  1. The purpose of this paper is to advise Tony who is an organic farmer

    Furthermore, it is essential for Tony to demonstrate a sufficient interest in the decision complained under s 31(3) of the Supreme Court Act 1981. This should be relatively easy to establish as the facts state that Tony is an organic farmer who specialises in the produce of a variety of organic vegetables.

  2. Torts project - Payment of Compensation in Hit and Run Motor Accident.

    if compensation has already been paid under Section 161, direct the person liable to pay the compensation awarded by it to refund to the insurer, so much thereof as is required to be refunded in according with the provision of sub-section 91); (b)

  1. Indigenous peoples, almost without exception, have been dispossessed and disregarded by those who 'discovered' ...

    of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence." This article, in particular the last sentence of paragraph two, seems to apply to the predicament of the Gorgians perfectly.

  2. The Nature of Law in Society

    ?the greatest good for the greatest number). Mill?s refinement of the idea argues that whilst this idea is true, the individual should not have to follow society?s morals, and should be free to act as they wish, provided their acts do not harm others. Hart, who was influenced by the theories of Mill, stated that legal enforcement

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work