enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. The court accepted that "[t]he more substantial the interference with human rights, the more the court will require by way of justification before it is satisfied that the decision is reasonable". This is as long as the decision remains within the range of responses open to a reasonable decision-maker. [26]

  3. Baker v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v_Canada_(Minister...

    On appeal, the Supreme Court of Canada reversed this decision. It held that procedural fairness required the decision-maker to consider the human rights of Baker's children. Children's human rights are outlined in the international Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Supreme Court said that decision-makers must be "reasonable".

  4. Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Provincial...

    Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 [1] is an English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness in the decision of a public body, which would make it liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.

  5. Decision-making software - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision-making_software

    A good summary of the capabilities of various software packages is available in the Decision Analysis Software Survey conducted by the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS). The software packages listed in the survey range from free to commercial or enterprise-level packages.

  6. Standard of review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_review

    In Canada, a decision of a tribunal, board, commission or other government decision-maker can be reviewed on one of several standards depending on the circumstances. In each case, a court must undertake a "standard of review analysis" to determine the appropriate standard to apply. [ 13 ]

  7. Relevant and irrelevant considerations in Singapore ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relevant_and_irrelevant...

    If a decision-maker has determined that a particular consideration is relevant to its decision, it is entitled to attribute to it whatever weight it thinks fit, and the courts will not interfere unless it has acted in a Wednesbury-unreasonable manner. This is consistent with the principle that the courts are generally only concerned with the ...

  8. Recusal - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recusal

    Personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or the lawyer of that party is a significant ground for recusal in the United States. [14] The Due Process clauses of the United States Constitution explicitly require judges to recuse themselves from cases where there is a strong possibility the decision would be biased. [15]

  9. Reasonableness - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonableness

    The concept of reasonableness has two related meanings in law and political theory: . As a legal norm, it is used "for the assessment of such matters as actions, decisions, and persons, rules and institutions, [and] also arguments and judgments."