The interface between administrative Law and constitutional principles
š 1. Understanding the Interface: Administrative Law & Constitutional Principles
Administrative Law:
Deals with the actions and decisions of public bodies, ensuring they are lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair.
Focuses on judicial review, delegated legislation, and remedies against misuse of power.
Constitutional Principles (Key ones that overlap with administrative law):
Rule of Law: All public authorities must act within the law.
Separation of Powers: Ensures executive action is subject to judicial oversight.
Parliamentary Sovereignty: Only Parliament can make or unmake law.
Legality: Public bodies can only act within the powers conferred by law.
Proportionality, Legitimate Expectation, Natural Justice: Principles derived from both constitutional values and administrative law doctrine.
Thus, administrative law enforces constitutional norms by holding public bodies accountable for the abuse of power or failure to respect rights.
š 2. Key Cases Illustrating the Interface
A. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 AC 513
Facts:
The Home Secretary decided not to bring into force a statutory criminal injuries compensation scheme and instead introduced a new one via prerogative powers.
Issue:
Whether the Home Secretary could refuse to implement a scheme enacted by Parliament.
Holding:
The House of Lords held the minister's actions unlawfully usurped Parliamentās legislative role, violating constitutional principles.
Significance:
Strong illustration of parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law.
Reinforced that administrative decisions cannot override legislation, even if not yet in force.
Administrative discretion must be exercised consistently with constitutional limits.
B. R (Evans) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21
Facts:
A journalist requested the release of Prince Charlesās āblack spider memosā under the Freedom of Information Act.
The Upper Tribunal ordered disclosure. The Attorney General issued a certificate under s.53 FOIA to override the judgment.
Issue:
Could a member of the executive override a judicial decision through executive certificate?
Holding:
Supreme Court ruled that the Attorney Generalās action was unlawful.
Emphasised constitutional separation of powers and the rule of law.
Significance:
Showed how administrative discretion is limited by constitutional norms.
Reinforced the independence of the judiciary and legal certainty.
C. Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (GCHQ case) [1985] AC 374
Facts:
The Prime Minister issued an order (via prerogative power) barring GCHQ staff from joining trade unions, without prior consultation.
Issue:
Whether prerogative powers are subject to judicial review.
Holding:
House of Lords held that prerogative powers are reviewable, depending on the nature of the power.
In this case, national security exempted the decision from review.
Significance:
Landmark case confirming that constitutional principles like fairness apply even to executive powers.
Rule of law demands that all public powers, even prerogative, are subject to legal limits.
D. R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5
Facts:
The government wanted to trigger Article 50 (Brexit) without an Act of Parliament.
Issue:
Could the executive use prerogative power to change domestic law by withdrawing from the EU?
Holding:
Supreme Court said no. Parliament must authorize such a fundamental constitutional change.
Significance:
A case where administrative action intersected with deep constitutional issues.
Reasserted the principle of parliamentary sovereignty and separation of powers.
Showed how administrative decisions must be grounded in legal authority, especially when affecting constitutional arrangements.
E. R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51
Facts:
The Lord Chancellor introduced high tribunal fees, which deterred claimants from bringing employment cases.
Issue:
Did the fee order interfere with the constitutional right of access to justice?
Holding:
Supreme Court quashed the order, holding it unconstitutional as it denied effective access to courts.
Significance:
Strong articulation of the rule of law as a constitutional principle.
Administrative law ensures proportionality and legality of measures that affect constitutional rights like access to justice.
F. R (Cart) v Upper Tribunal [2011] UKSC 28
Facts:
Cart challenged a decision of the Upper Tribunal to refuse permission to appeal.
Issue:
Could the High Court judicially review decisions of the Upper Tribunal?
Holding:
Supreme Court allowed judicial review in exceptional cases (e.g. error of law of general public importance).
Significance:
This case balances the finality of tribunal decisions with the constitutional requirement of legality.
Ensures that administrative decisions are not immune from oversight.
G. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Daly [2001] UKHL 26
Facts:
Daly, a prisoner, challenged a prison policy that allowed cell searches in his absence, including reading legal correspondence.
Issue:
Whether the policy infringed the right to private communication with a lawyer.
Holding:
The House of Lords ruled the policy disproportionately infringed Dalyās rights under the ECHR.
Significance:
This case imported the principle of proportionality (EU and ECHR origin) into UK public law.
Bridges constitutional rights (fair trial) and administrative action (prison regulation).
š 3. Summary Table: Interface of Admin Law & Constitutional Principles
| Case | Key Principle | Constitutional Interface |
|---|---|---|
| Fire Brigades Union | Ministerial discretion must respect Parliament | Parliamentary sovereignty, Rule of Law |
| Evans v AG | Executive can't override courts arbitrarily | Separation of Powers, Judicial Independence |
| GCHQ Case | Prerogative power is reviewable | Rule of Law, Procedural Fairness |
| Miller (No. 1) | Parliament must authorize fundamental change | Sovereignty, Constitutional Statutes |
| UNISON v Lord Chancellor | Tribunal fees must allow access to justice | Rule of Law, Access to Justice as Constitutional Right |
| Cart v Upper Tribunal | Some tribunal decisions reviewable | Judicial Review, Legality |
| Daly | Proportionality in administrative decisions | Human Rights, Fundamental Fairness |
āļø 4. Conclusion
The interface between administrative law and constitutional principles ensures that public bodies:
Act within their legal limits (legality),
Respect individual rights (e.g., fairness, proportionality),
Remain subject to oversight (rule of law),
And do not usurp powers reserved for Parliament (sovereignty).
This area remains dynamic, especially with developments in human rights law, Brexit, and judicial review reforms.
RELATED Blog
0 comments