The writ of prohibition as a remedy in administrative law
The Writ of Prohibition as a Remedy in Administrative Law
1. What is the Writ of Prohibition?
The writ of prohibition is an extraordinary judicial remedy issued by a higher court to a lower court, tribunal, or administrative body, ordering it to stop doing something it has no jurisdiction or authority to do. It prevents the excess or abuse of jurisdiction before the act is committed or continued.
2. Purpose and Nature
To prevent inferior courts or tribunals from exceeding their jurisdiction.
It is preventive, not corrective — issued before or during a proceeding, not after.
Protects the principle that a body should only exercise powers lawfully granted.
Ensures administrative bodies act within the scope of their authority.
3. When is Writ of Prohibition Granted?
The lower court or tribunal acts without jurisdiction or exceeds jurisdiction.
The action threatens to cause irreparable damage or injustice.
No alternative adequate remedy is available.
The petitioner has clean hands (no misconduct).
The writ will not be granted if the matter is already decided or completed.
4. Key Case Laws on the Writ of Prohibition
Case 1: R v Medical Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Gilmore (1957)
Facts: A Medical Appeal Tribunal made a decision allegedly outside its jurisdiction.
Issue: Whether the writ of prohibition could prevent the tribunal from proceeding.
Judgment: The court granted the writ, stating prohibition is appropriate to prevent a tribunal acting beyond its statutory powers.
Significance: Affirmed prohibition as a remedy for excess of jurisdiction by administrative bodies.
Case 2: American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd (1975)
Facts: This is a leading case on interlocutory injunctions but also discussed writs of prohibition.
Issue: Whether prohibition could be granted to restrain a body from acting without jurisdiction.
Judgment: The court laid down principles including the requirement of a serious question to be tried and balance of convenience.
Significance: Clarified conditions for granting prohibition, aligning it with principles of equity.
Case 3: Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission (1969)
Facts: The Commission made an error of law and acted outside its jurisdiction.
Issue: Whether prohibition could be used to restrain such ultra vires acts.
Judgment: The court held that errors of law invalidate decisions and prohibition can be issued.
Significance: Expanded scope of prohibition to cover decisions based on jurisdictional errors.
Case 4: R v Electricity Commissioners, ex parte London Electricity Joint Committee (1924)
Facts: The Electricity Commissioners were alleged to have acted beyond powers granted by statute.
Issue: Whether prohibition was appropriate.
Judgment: The court granted the writ, emphasizing that public bodies must act within statutory limits.
Significance: Early authority on the use of prohibition against regulatory bodies.
Case 5: R v Bow Street Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2) (2000)
Facts: A judicial officer failed to disclose bias in a proceeding.
Issue: Whether prohibition was appropriate to stop a biased judicial process.
Judgment: The House of Lords granted prohibition on grounds of bias and abuse of jurisdiction.
Significance: Demonstrated prohibition’s role in upholding natural justice and preventing abuse of process.
Case 6: M v Home Office (1993)
Facts: The Home Secretary allegedly failed to comply with court orders.
Issue: Use of prohibition to prevent illegal exercise of power.
Judgment: The court reinforced prohibition as a remedy to ensure authorities act lawfully.
Significance: Showed prohibition can be used to control executive excesses.
5. Summary
The writ of prohibition is a vital tool in administrative law for controlling jurisdictional errors and excess of power by administrative bodies, tribunals, and lower courts. It acts as a preventive remedy ensuring public authorities act lawfully and within their powers. Courts have consistently emphasized its use in cases of jurisdictional overreach, bias, or procedural unfairness.
RELATED Blog
0 comments