Delegated legislation: meaning and need
Delegated Legislation: Meaning and Need
Meaning of Delegated Legislation
Delegated Legislation (also called subordinate legislation) refers to laws made by an authority other than the legislature but under powers conferred by the legislature.
It is a form of law-making where the Parliament delegates its legislative powers to:
The executive (government ministers),
Administrative authorities,
Local bodies, or
Tribunals.
These laws are made in the form of rules, regulations, by-laws, orders, or notifications.
The power to make delegated legislation is usually given through an Enabling Act or Parent Act.
Why is Delegated Legislation Needed?
Volume and Complexity:
Parliaments cannot make detailed rules on every subject.
Delegated legislation allows detailed and technical rules to be made efficiently.
Expertise:
Specialized agencies or experts can create regulations requiring technical knowledge.
Flexibility and Speed:
Delegated legislation can be quickly enacted and amended to respond to changing circumstances, emergencies, or urgent needs.
Local Needs:
Local bodies can make by-laws suited to regional or local requirements.
Administrative Convenience:
Saves Parliament's time by focusing on broad policies.
Types of Delegated Legislation
Statutory Instruments: Rules and regulations made by ministers.
By-laws: Made by local authorities or corporations.
Orders in Council: Made by the Queen and Privy Council, often for emergencies.
Rules and Notifications: Made by administrative agencies.
Key Case Law on Delegated Legislation
1. R. v. Home Secretary, ex parte Fire Brigades Union (1995)
Facts: The Home Secretary promised to implement a new compensation scheme but later changed his mind.
Issue: Whether the Home Secretary’s action to abandon the scheme was lawful under the delegated powers.
Holding: The Court held the Home Secretary could not frustrate the statutory scheme by refusing to implement it.
Significance: Emphasized that delegated legislation must comply with the scope and purpose of the Enabling Act.
2. Agricultural, Horticultural and Forestry Development Board v. Aylesbury Mushrooms Ltd. (1972)
Facts: A statutory instrument was challenged for being ultra vires (beyond powers).
Issue: Whether procedural requirements prescribed in the Enabling Act were followed.
Holding: The Court held the delegated legislation invalid because the procedural safeguards were not observed.
Significance: Reinforced that delegated legislation must follow the conditions and procedures laid down in the parent Act.
3. R. (on the application of Anufrijeva) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (2003)
Facts: The Home Office failed to notify a claimant about the cessation of her benefit.
Issue: Whether delegated legislation provided a fair procedure.
Holding: The court held that delegated legislation must comply with principles of natural justice and fairness.
Significance: Established the procedural fairness requirement for delegated legislation.
4. Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service (1985) (GCHQ case)
Facts: Government banned union membership without consultation.
Issue: Whether such decisions were reviewable and lawful.
Holding: While recognizing prerogative powers, the Court ruled that government decisions made under delegated powers are subject to judicial review.
Significance: Clarified limits on executive powers and the applicability of judicial review to delegated legislation.
5. R. v. Secretary of State for Health, ex parte Coughlan (2001)
Facts: A hospital patient was promised a “home for life” but the policy changed.
Issue: Whether the government’s change breached legitimate expectations created by delegated legislation.
Holding: Court upheld the principle that public authorities must honor legitimate expectations arising from delegated legislation.
Significance: Established that fairness and consistency are required when exercising delegated legislative powers.
6. R. v. Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Nottinghamshire County Council (1986)
Facts: Challenge against a statutory instrument concerning grant reduction.
Issue: Whether the delegated legislation was a misuse of power.
Holding: The court invalidated the regulation as it was deemed an improper use of delegated powers.
Significance: Affirmed that delegated legislation must be used for the purposes authorized by the Enabling Act.
Summary
Delegated legislation enables efficient and flexible lawmaking under parliamentary authority.
It is necessary for dealing with complex, technical, or local issues.
However, delegated legislation must:
Stay within the limits set by the Enabling Act.
Follow procedural safeguards.
Comply with principles of natural justice.
Courts exercise judicial review to prevent misuse or abuse of delegated legislative powers.
RELATED Blog
0 comments