Abstract:
One of the leading New Zealand authorities on the illegality ground of judicial review is Attorney-General v Ireland. The Court of Appeal in that case recognised a category of unauthorised but not improper purposes that do not invalidate a decision. This article addresses two questions arising from Ireland. First, it seeks to clarify the extent of toleration of unauthorised purposes following Ireland. Secondly, it defends the decision against the charge that it is fundamentally contrary to the rule of law.
