About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

2008 N.Z. L. Rev. 423 (2008)
Proportionality, Deference, Wednesbury

handle is hein.journals/newzlndlr2008 and id is 435 raw text is: Proportionality, Deference, Wednesbury MICHAEL TAGGART* This is an opinionated attempt to chart the future direction of unreasonableness review of discretionary power in New Zealand administrative law over the short-to-medium term. First, I survey the proportionality versus Wednesbury (un)reasonableness debate in the United Kingdom and New Zealand. Then I argue that proportion- ality should replace variable Wednesbury (un)reasonableness review where human and other 'fundamental rights are directly engaged, and that in other cases involving public wrongs (where rights are not directly engaged) Wednesbury unreasonableness in the traditional sense should be retained and applied. Drawing a line between rights and public wrongs - however difficult in borderline cases - should encourage lawyers, judges, and jurists to think carefully about where the case should be situated on the rainbow of review and why. While it is highly unlikely that this article will stem the torrent of discussion on this topic, it will be my last word on the subject. *Alexander Turner Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, The University of Auckland. Earlier versions of this article were presented as papers at the Crown Law Office (Wellington), the School of Law in the University of Canterbury, and at a one-day conference on judicial review organized by the New Zealand Law Society. Thanks to those audiences and to my administrative law students for testing the ideas. I have had an extraordinary amount of feedback on this article, much of it critical, from administrative lawyers who put aside their own work to assist in improving mine: Helen Aikman, Mark Aronson, George Barton, David Dyzenhaus, Mark Elliott, David Goddard, Gordon Anthony, Matthew Groves, Bruce Harris, Murray Hunt, Aileen Kavanagh, Dean Knight, Peter Leyland, Janet McLean, David Mullan, Tom Poole, Paul Rishworth, and Hanna Wilberg. Circumstances have conspired to prevent me taking all their points on board in revising this article for publication.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most