Interrogating "Absolute discretion": are NZ's Parliament and Courts compromising the rule of law?

Show simple item record Wilberg, Hanna en
dc.contributor.editor Groves, M en 2018-10-09T01:43:13Z en 2017-10-20 en 2017-12 en
dc.identifier.issn 0067-205X en
dc.identifier.uri en
dc.description.abstract It is elementary in administrative law that there is no such thing as unfettered discretion—yet, in a development that appears to have gone largely unnoticed, statutes increasingly confer ‘absolute discretion’ on public decision-makers. This article explores and evaluates these provisions and their judicial treatment in New Zealand. It surveys the range of contexts in which they are used and the various purposes or functions they appear to serve, and evaluates each against orthodoxy. It also surveys the judicial responses to such provisions, finding that these are mixed and too often muted. Of particular concern are the ‘absolute discretion’ provisions in the Immigration Act, and the lack of a consistently resolute judicial response to these. en
dc.relation.ispartofseries Federal Law Review en
dc.rights Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. en
dc.rights.uri en
dc.title Interrogating "Absolute discretion": are NZ's Parliament and Courts compromising the rule of law? en
dc.type Journal Article en
pubs.issue 4 en
pubs.begin-page 541 en
pubs.volume 45 en
dc.rights.holder Copyright: The author en
pubs.end-page 568 en
pubs.publication-status Published en
dc.rights.accessrights en
pubs.subtype Article en
pubs.elements-id 698997 en Law en Faculty Administration Law en
pubs.record-created-at-source-date 2017-10-23 en

Files in this item

There are no files associated with this item.

Find Full text

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Search ResearchSpace