Publications

This is a searchable catalogue of the College's most recent books, book chapters, journal articles and working papers. The ANU College of Law also publishes a Research Paper Series on SSRN.

Australian Journal of Administrative Law

Three giants of Australian administrative law honoured

Author(s): Greg Weeks, Matthew Groves

On 7 February 2022, The Australian National University awarded degrees of Doctor of Laws honoris causa to three of its Emeritus Professors: Robin Creyke, John McMillan and Dennis Pearce. Professors Creyke, McMillan and Pearce have been honoured for their immense contributions to Australian administrative law previously, having each been made Officers of the Order of Australia and Fellows of the Australian Academy of Law. Each has also been the subject of a festschrift, a “published collection of legal essays written by several authors to honour a distinguished jurist”. While Professors Creyke, McMillan and Pearce each have a distinguished record of public service (including as members of the Administrative Review Council and as long-serving executive members of the Australian Institute of Administrative Law), it was especially pleasing for them to be recognised as academics with connections to the ANU going back decades.

Access here

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

Judicial Review of Administrative Action and Government Liability

Judicial Review of Administrative Action and Government Liability (7th ed)

Author(s): Greg Weeks, Mark Aronson, Matthew Groves

Judicial Review of Administrative Action and Government Liability Seventh Edition (2022, Thomson Reuters) is one of Australia’s most respected legal texts. It was selected as the first title in Thomson Reuters’ prestigious Lawbook Library Series, because it represents definitive legal scholarship and publishing excellence in Australian law.

For almost three decades, this work has both mapped and supported development of the law and practice of judicial review of administrative action throughout Australia. Repeatedly cited in the High Court of Australia, this landmark work remains the definitive scholarly work for judicial officers, practitioners and students alike.

In this edition, the authors have restructured the book, and have added new chapters responding to debate about Australia's distinctive approach to judicial review and the obligation to support administrative decisions with statements of reasons.

Buy now

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

AIAL Forum

Government schemes for extrajudicial compensation: an assessment

Author(s): Greg Weeks, Sarah Lim, Nathalie Ng

Providing redress where loss has been suffered is not the sole preserve of the judiciary. At least in part, this is because loss can be suffered by individuals in the absence of legal liability. While this is not the exclusive province of public entities, it is more commonly the case that ‘moral liability’ justifying the payment of compensation is borne by public entities. For one thing, public entities generally have a much greater capacity to cause individuals — even relatively sophisticated or commercially adept parties — to act in a way that they otherwise might not. Government and other public figures come cloaked in authority, with the consequence that people are more likely to comply with requests or instructions. Such compliance will frequently not create a legal obligation if the individual suffers loss. Compensation schemes are premised on the belief that the action might nonetheless create moral obligations and that these can be a sufficient basis for compensation to issue.

This article considers the provision of compensation outside the legal system, usually paid on the basis of ‘moral liability’ rather than a claim founded in law. There are a number of different schemes in place which may achieve this end, across every Australian jurisdiction and they are both statutory and executive.

Access here

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

maladministration.jpg

Maladministration: the Particular Jurisdiction of the Ombudsman

Author(s): Greg Weeks

The office of the ombudsman is much misunderstood. Is it better viewed as part of the executive or the judiciary? Is it a fragile institution, unprotected with security of tenure? Is it a ‘toothless tiger’? The one constant in the face of such inquiries is that ombudsmen don’t seem to care, or at least carry on with great effectiveness as though they don’t. I would argue in any case that such queries are beside the point and that the one thing that must be understood about the ombudsman is that it is an office with a particular purpose.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

Public Finance and Parliamentary Constitutionalism

Public Finance and Parliamentary Constitutionalism

Author(s): Will Bateman

Public Finance and Parliamentary Constitutionalism analyses constitutionalism and public finance (tax, expenditure, audit, sovereign borrowing and monetary finance) in Anglophone parliamentary systems of government. The book surveys the history of public finance law in the UK, its export throughout the British Empire, and its entrenchment in Commonwealth constitutions. It explains how modern constitutionalism was shaped by the financial impact of warfare, welfare-state programs and the growth of central banking. It then provides a case study analysis of the impact of economic condition on governments' financial behaviour, focusing on the UK's and Australia's responses to the financial crisis, and the judiciary's position vis-à-vis the state's financial powers. Throughout, it questions orthodox accounts of financial constitutionalism (particularly the views of A. V. Dicey) and the democratic legitimacy of public finance. Currently ignored aspects of government behaviour are analysed in-depth, particularly the constitutional role of central banks and sovereign debt markets.

> Provides the first constitutional analysis of public finance law and practice in UK and Commonwealth jurisdictions

> Provides an historical treatment of legal and constitutional dimensions of public finance in British and Commonwealth jurisdictions

> Accessibly explains how government, law and economic conditions interact before, during and after moments of economic crisis, using the UK and Australia as examples

Access here

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law, Constitutional Law and Theory, Law and Technology, Regulatory Law and Policy

Judicial Review’s Exclusion by Privative Clauses: Dead or Just Resting?

Author(s): Greg Weeks

The privative clause is dead – or so we are told. Nonetheless, it remains a topic of conversation and judicial attention in both Australia and England, albeit for somewhat different reasons. The Australian approach to privative clauses is substantially coloured by the relevance attached to the concept of jurisdictional error and is therefore distinctly constitutional in its outlook. The English courts have long ago dismissed the role of jurisdictional error and, although they continue to rely on the precedent of Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147, do so while rejecting the reasoning which informs the use of that case in Australia. This article considers the approaches taken in both jurisdictions and attempts to set out the continuing relevance of the privative clause in Australia.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

The Creation of Australian Administrative Law: The Constitution and its Judicial Gate-Keepers

The Creation of Australian Administrative Law: The Constitution and Its Judicial Gate-Keepers

Author(s): Greg Weeks

For a long time judicial review in Australia was little more than a carbon copy of its English equivalent. In the period before the various Australian states became part of a unified federal nation, judicial review occurred within the inherent supervisory jurisdiction of the various Supreme Courts of those individual colonies and proceeded in a manner similar to that of English courts exercising inherent supervisory jurisdiction. The Australian Constitution is now the defining feature and dominant force of our judicial review doctrine.

The key feature of the Australian Constitution that has enabled the recognition and entrenchment of judicial review of administrative action is the express creation and entrenchment of the courts. The express recognition and protection of a selection of the judicial remedies has proved equally important because the constitutional mention of some of the traditional remedies of judicial review has provided the foundation for the courts to entrench by implication that which necessarily precedes the issue of those remedies. While these and other important elements of the Australian Constitution have enabled the development of constitutionally protected avenues of supervisory review, this same constitutional foundation has also provided the source of judicial review principles that increasingly differ from their early English heritage. Many parallels between English and Australian principles remain and the one we discuss about natural justice suggests that, as happens within so many families, Australian judicial review can unwittingly replicate the mistakes of its English parent.

Access here

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

jurisdictional_error_as_conceptual_totem.jpg

Jurisdictional Error As Conceptual Totem

Author(s): Leighton McDonald

Jurisdictional error is pivotal but not, in any substantive sense, ‘central’. It is pivotal because it marks important boundaries (drawn by reference to other ideas) in the law of judicial review of executive action. This pivotal but not central role has enabled jurisdictional error to function as a ‘conceptual totem’, emblematic of a determinedly ‘statutory approach’ to the articulation and elaboration of administrative law norms. After elaborating these claims, the article goes on to doubt the constitutional case for the retention of the statutory approach that, in recent years, has come to characterise the Australian approach to jurisdictional error. Recognition of the totemic function of jurisdictional error, it is concluded, is a helpful first step in better understanding and analysing administrative law norms which bear no obvious relation to statute.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law, Constitutional Law and Theory, Legal Theory

the_creation_of_australian_administrative.jpg

The Creation of Australian Administrative Law: The Constitution and Its Judicial Gate-Keepers

Author(s): Greg Weeks

For a long time judicial review in Australia was little more than a carbon copy of its English equivalent. In the period before the various Australian states became part of a unified federal nation, judicial review occurred within the inherent supervisory jurisdiction of the various Supreme Courts of those individual colonies and proceeded in a manner similar to that of English courts exercising inherent supervisory jurisdiction. The Australian Constitution is now the defining feature and dominant force of our judicial review doctrine. The key feature of the Australian Constitution that has enabled the recognition and entrenchment of judicial review of administrative action is the express creation and entrenchment of the courts. The express recognition and protection of a selection of the judicial remedies has proved equally important because the constitutional mention of some of the traditional remedies of judicial review has provided the foundation for the courts to entrench by implication that which necessarily precedes the issue of those remedies. While these and other important elements of the Australian Constitution have enabled the development of constitutionally protected avenues of supervisory review, this same constitutional foundation has also provided the source of judicial review principles that increasingly differ from their early English heritage. Many parallels between English and Australian principles remain and the one we discuss about natural justice suggests that, as happens within so many families, Australian judicial review can unwittingly replicate the mistakes of its English parent.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

algorithmic_decision-making_and_legality.jpg

Algorithmic Decision-Making and Legality: Public Law Dimensions

Author(s): Will Bateman

Automating the exercise of statutory powers through algorithmic decision-making carries high levels of legal risk. Fundamental public law doctrines assume that legal powers will be exercised by a particular kind of decision-making agent: one with sufficient cognitive capacities to understand the interpretative complexity of legal instruments and respond to highly dynamic environments. Public law doctrines also assume that clear reasons can be given for the exercise of public power and, by default, attribute legal responsibility for the exercise of statutory powers to a human being bearing political and social responsibility. Those doctrines provide the standards against which the legality of algorithmic decision-making in the public sector must be tested and, until they are met, lawyers should be sceptical of suggestions that statutory powers can be automated.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law, Constitutional Law and Theory, Law and Technology, Regulatory Law and Policy

Government Liability: Principles and Remedies

Government Liability: Principles and Remedies

Author(s): Greg Weeks, Dr Janina Boughey, Dr Ellen Rock

Given the degree of power wielded by Australian government officials and entities, it is unsurprising that government decisions and conduct frequently impact on individuals. To find the most appropriate way to resolve a particular case, practitioners must be able to work across the traditional legal ‘silos’, drawing on public and private law principles as well as the important, and often under-valued, roles of non-legal accountability mechanisms. This book familiarises readers with some of the complexities underpinning this area and covers public law remedies, private law remedies, and statutory remedies.

Purchase your copy online

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

oral_history_gender_and_law.jpg

Oral History, Gender and Law

Author(s): Kim Rubenstein

This article considers the relationship between law and gender by sharing information about an oral history project analysing the experience of women lawyers in the public, civic space and women’s experience of lawyering in Australia and of Australian lawyers working in the international context.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL, CLAH

Research theme: Administrative Law, Constitutional Law and Theory, Human Rights Law and Policy, Law and Gender, Legal History and Ethnology, Migration and Movement of Peoples

soft_law_and_public_liability.jpg

Soft Law and Public Liability: Beyond the Separation of Powers?

Author(s): Greg Weeks

Soft law refers to domestic, non-legislative instruments which are designed to influence, modify or otherwise affect conduct. It relies for this result on the fact that people generally assume that soft law requires them to act and has immediate legal effect. Where this assumption is mistaken, individuals have a limited capacity to obtain remedies where public authorities fail to adhere to the terms of their published soft law. This paper examines reliance on soft law and considers a selection of the diverse forms in which it appears. It considers which remedies are available where an individual suffers loss as a result of relying on soft law and asks whether and how the separation of powers doctrine can be updated to attach legal significance to the proliferation of soft law. Soft law is a topic about which little has been written. Given its importance as a regulatory tool, a fuller analysis of its place within the separation of powers model is both timely and original.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

monetary_awards_for_public_law_wrongs.jpg

Monetary Awards for Public Law Wrongs: Australia's Resistant Legal Landscape

Author(s): Greg Weeks

The idea of introducing a monetary remedy for harm arising out of the misdirected exercise of public power has waxed and waned in popularity in Australia over the years. Though few would dispute the intuitive appeal of the sentiment that ‘wrongs should not go unremedied’, the question of why this is so and how harm arising from maladministration could, or should, be repaired remains unresolved. This article canvasses a number of the potential justifications for the creation of such a remedy, before noting the various avenues the Australian courts have considered, and closed down, which might otherwise have led in that direction. These rejected opportunities have included the expansion of existing tort actions (eg misfeasance in public office and breach of statutory duty), the creation of new causes of action in tort (eg the Beaudesert tort and constitutional torts), and the interpretation of statutory remedial powers (eg the power to ‘do justice between the parties’ pursuant to the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth)). Whatever the virtue of a remedy on this front, it is clear that it will need to be a matter of legislative, rather than judicial, intervention.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

rights_in_the_australian_federation.jpg

Rights in the Australian Federation

Author(s): James Stellios

The Australian Constitution is unique among constitutional instruments. It was primarily designed to federate self-governing British colonies within the British constitutional tradition and to establish institutions of federal government. As such, the constitutional instrument does not contain an entrenched Bill of Rights. Yet, Australia has been a stable federal democracy since its establishment in 1901 and, by international standards, it is consistently assessed as maintaining high levels of personal freedom, political rights, civil liberties and the rule of law. This article considers the place of rights in the Australian federation against Australian constitutional history and its constitutional context.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law, Constitutional Law and Theory, International Law

Power, Control and Citizenship: The Uluru Statement from the Heart as Active Citizenship

Author(s): Kim Rubenstein

Who governs and how they govern is central to the questions of power, control and citizenship that are at the core of a democratic society. The Uluru Statement from the Heart is the outcome of the 12 First Nations Regional Dialogues culminating in the National Constitutional Convention at Uluru in May 2017. There the First Peoples from across the country formed a consensus position on the form constitutional recognition should take. This article argues that the Uluru Statement from the Heart affirms a commitment to ‘active citizenship’ that draws from a belief in the equal power of the governors and the governed. This understanding of the Uluru Statement from the Heart enables it to be promoted as a document for all Australians, both in the spirit of reconciliation and in its affirmation of a commitment to an equality underpinning Australian citizenship in the 21st century. By examining how citizenship in Australia has evolved as a legal concept and by reflecting on how law is a fundamental tool for providing a ‘meaningful limitation of the lawgiver’s power in favour of the agency of the legal subject’, this article examines the Uluru Statement from the Heart as a commitment to the importance of recognising the nature of the proper relationship between the law giver and those subject to the law — the citizenry. To exercise power within a democratic framework, as opposed to brute force or sheer will over the subject, involves recognising the agency of the citizenry. This idea not only enables reconciliation to be a meaningful and restorative act but one that recalibrates the exercise of power in Australia to benefit all Australians by affirming a commitment to all Australians equal citizenship as active agents.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL, CLAH

Research theme: Administrative Law, Constitutional Law and Theory, Human Rights Law and Policy, Law and Gender, Legal History and Ethnology, Migration and Movement of Peoples

Peer Review and the Global Anti-Corruption Conventions: Context, Theory and Practice

Peer Review and the Global Anti-Corruption Conventions: Context, Theory and Practice

Author(s): Kath Hall

This article analyses the international anti-corruption framework and the peer review monitoring process. Peer review is described as the “systematic examination and assessment of the performance of a state by other states, with the ultimate goal of helping the reviewed state … comply with established standards and principles.” However, despite its growing importance as a regulatory process, peer review has not been comprehensively analysed, resulting in a “literature famine” on its nature and operations. Indeed, to date, there has been very limited academic discussion on peer review. As a result, one aim of this article is to contribute to a stronger understanding of its process. While our focus is on peer review in the anti-corruption context, where possible, universal characteristics of the process are discussed. The second objective of this article is to consider the merits of the peer review process in incentivising states to take action against corruption. Peer review is the mechanism for evaluation of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) under its Anti-bribery Convention and the African Union’s (AU) good governance objectives under good governance objectives under the Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). Whilst acknowledging the criticisms of peer review, this article argues that peer review has been successful in particular contexts in increasing state compliance with these international instruments. In particular, peer review has contributed to the acceptance of anti-corruption norms and focused on the need for all countries to regulate corruption at the national level.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CCL, CIPL, LGDI

Research theme: Administrative Law, Law and Psychology, Legal Education, Private Law, Regulatory Law and Policy, The Legal Profession

Court records as Archives

Court Records As Archives: The Need for Law Reform to Ensure Access

Author(s): Andrew Henderson, Kim Rubenstein

The Federal Court of Australia performs a fundamentally important role within Australia’s democratic system. It has served as a site for the disputation, negotiation and resolution of issues fundamentally important to Australian society. It does so in the context of a constitutional system affirming the principle of separation of powers and the rule of law, as a means of preserving and enforcing the rights of individuals and navigating the boundaries of the powers of the state. In that context, its records, gathered both through the internal workings of the court and through the cases that come before it, contain a narrative shaping our contemporary understanding of the rights of the individual and the role of the state. Despite the importance of its records in that narrative, the preservation and access to the Federal Court’s records continues to be seen through the lens of traditional understandings of the management of litigation. This paper explores the Federal Court’s role within the broader context of constructing our understanding of the roles and responsibilities of citizenship and illustrates the importance of the Court’s records as an archival resource. In doing so, it highlights the parallels and inconsistencies between traditional archival institutions and the Court in relation to selection, preservation and access to records.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL, CLAH

Research theme: Administrative Law, Constitutional Law and Theory, Human Rights Law and Policy, Law and Gender, Legal Education, Legal History and Ethnology, Migration and Movement of Peoples, The Legal Profession

adjr_at_40.jpg

ADJR at 40: In its Prime or a Disappointment to its Parents?

Author(s): Greg Weeks

The commencement of the ADJR Act represented a significant moment in Australian administrative law. This paper will discuss the impact of the ADJR Act and its continuing relevance.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

planning_and_soft_law.jpg

Planning and Soft Law

Author(s): Greg Weeks

Complex regulatory systems are particularly in need of regulation capable of maintaining both high standards and consistency in decision-making. Soft law is frequently the mechanism of choice to achieve these ends, since it can be made and altered with relative ease but is nonetheless treated as though it were hard and enforceable ‘law’. The law around environmental planning decisions, although subject to detailed legislative control, makes extensive and predominantly effective use of soft law. However, the use of soft law always carries some risk and this is generally imposed asymmetrically upon individuals rather than public bodies. This article will consider these issues, taking account of several relevant cases.

Read on SSRN

Centre: CIPL

Research theme: Administrative Law

Pages

Updated:  10 August 2015/Responsible Officer:  College General Manager, ANU College of Law/Page Contact:  Law Marketing Team