Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service (1983), [63] Lord Diplock stated that for a decision to be susceptible to judicial review, the decision-maker must be empowered by public law, and the ultimate source of power is nearly always a statute or subordinate legislation. However, this "source test" ignores many ...
In the seminal United Kingdom case of Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service ("the GCHQ case", 1983), [17] the House of Lords identified three well-established broad headings under which a claim for judicial review of administrative action may be made: illegality, irrationality, and; procedural impropriety.
Procedural impropriety in Singapore administrative law is one of the three broad categories of judicial review, the other two being illegality and irrationality.A public authority commits procedural impropriety if it fails to properly observe either statutory procedural requirements, or common law rules of natural justice and fairness.
Wednesbury unreasonableness was subsequently equated with irrationality by the House of Lords in Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service (the GCHQ case, 1983). These cases have been applied numerous times in Singapore, though in some decisions it is not very clear whether the courts have applied such a stringent standard.
As these reforms have not been followed in Singapore, [138] the Singapore High Court is not empowered to grant injunctions under Order 53 of the Rules of Court. In addition, if civil proceedings are taken against the Government, section 27 of the Government Proceedings Act [ 76 ] bars the High Court from granting injunctions against it.
The Singapore Civil Service is the bureaucracy of civil servants that supports the Government of Singapore. Along with the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF), statutory boards, and other independent government bodies, the civil service makes up the overall public service of Singapore. [1] As of 2022, the civil service has about 87,000 employees. [2]
Members of the largely public-sector trade union UNISON on strike for better pay at The Forum in Norwich, UK, in July 2008.In both the UK and Singapore, where a public authority has made a clear representation to individuals regarding a certain policy position it has taken, such as their remuneration, these persons have a legitimate expectation to be consulted before the policy is changed, and ...
In Singapore, there has yet to be any reported case in which an applicant sought a prohibiting order in a constitutional matter. However, in the administrative law context, in Re Fong Thin Choo (1991) [ 23 ] the High Court stated that the legal principles which apply to quashing orders are equally applicable to prohibiting orders.