Administrative Justice in Wales and Comparative Perspectives

Sarah Nason

Description

This book offers a unique understanding of what administrative justice means in Wales and for Wales, whilst also providing an expert and timely analysis of comparative developments in law and administration. It includes critical analysis of distinctly Welsh administrative laws and redress measures, whilst examining contemporary administrative justice issues across a range of common and civil law, European and international jurisdictions. Key issues include the roles of commissioners, administrative courts, tribunals and ombudsmen in devolved and federal nations, and evolving relationships between citizens and the state – especially in the context of localisation and austerity – and will be of interest to legal and public administration professionals at home and internationally.

List of Figures
List of Tables
Introduction: Administrative Justice in Wales and Comparative Perspectives
Sarah Nason…………………………………………………………………………………
PART 1
Welsh Legislation and Administrative Justice
1. Implications for Administrative Justice of Wales’ Unique Child Rights Laws
Jane Williams...............................................................................................................
2. The Housing (Wales) Act: What’s Philosophy got to do with it?
Helen Taylor.................................................................................................................
3. Administrative Justice and the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011
Catrin Fflur Huws…………………………………………………………………
PART 2
Welsh Commissioners and Administrative Justice
4. Language Commissioners and their Independence
Diarmait Mac Giolla Chríost ………………………………………………………
5. The Children’s Commissioner for Wales and the Older People’s Commissioner for Wales and the Administrative Justice System
Ann Sherlock and John Williams…………………………………………………...
PART 3
Administrative Justice Within and Across the UK: New Developments in Tribunals and Ombudsmanry
6. Opportunities and Constraints: Reflections on Reforming Administrative Justice Within and Across the UK
Brian Thompson…………………………………………………………………….
7. Current Developments in UK Tribunals: Challenges for Administrative Justice
Robert Thomas……………………………………………………………………...
8. Building a Welsh Jurisdiction through Administrative Justice
Huw Pritchard………………………………………………………………………
PART 4
Comparative Perspectives on Administrative justice
9. The Administrative Court and Administrative Law in Wales and Comparative Perspectives
Sarah Nason and David Gardner…………………………………………………..
10. The Shaping of Federal Administrative Justice in Belgium: Recasting Citizens–administration Relationships
Yseult Marique……………………………………………………………………...
11. Amalgamation of Tribunals: Whether ‘tis Better … ?
Robin Creyke..............................................................................................................
12. Administrative Justice Without Lawyers? Unrepresented Parties in Australian Tribunals
Matthew Groves……………………………………………………………………
13. Maintaining Administrative Justice in the Dutch Regulatory Welfare State
Albterjan Tollenaar…………………………………………………………………
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………….

Sujets

• Regulatory Practice
• Administrative Law
• Droit et juridique
• Law

Informations

• Publié par: University of Wales Press
• Date de parution: 15 septembre 2017
• Nombre de lectures: 2
• EAN13: 9781786831408
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 8 Mo

Extrait

T H E P U B L I C L A W O F W A L E S

Administrative Justice in Wales and Comparative Perspectives

T H E P U B L I C L A W O F W A L E S

EDITORIAL BOARD

General Editor: Thomas Glyn Watkin

Keith BushQCDîrector o the Lega Waes Foundatîon David DixonSenîor Lecturer, Cardîf Unîversîty

Dylan HughesFîrst Legîsatîve Counse, Wesh Government His Hon. Judge Milwyn Jarman QCSpecîaîst Chancery Judge or Waes Howard A. Johnsonormer Senîor Lecturer, Bangor Unîversîty Gwion LewisBarrîster, Landmark Chambers, London The Right Hon. Sir David Lloyd JonesLord Justîce o Appea and ormer Chaîr o the Law Commîssîon o Engand and Waes Lowri MorganHead o the Waes Oice, Law Socîety o Engand and Waes R. Gwynedd ParryProessor o Law, Swansea Unîversîty Dr Osian Dafydd ReesSenîor Lecturer, Bangor Unîversîty Winston Roddick QCPoîce Commîssîoner or North Waes, ormer Counse Genera, Natîona Assemby or Waes

Graham WaltersBarrîster, Cîvîtas Chambers, Cardîf Huw WilliamsSoîcîtor, Gedards, Cardîf John WilliamsProessor o Law, Aberystwyth Unîversîty

T H E P U B L I C L A W O F W A L E S

Administrative Justice in Wales and Comparative Perspectives

Edited by Sarah Nason

UNIVERSITY OF WALES PRESS 2017

© The Contrîbutors, 

A rîghts reserved. No part o thîs book may be reproduced în any materîa orm (încudîng photocopyîng or storîng ît în any medîum by eectronîc means and whether or not transîenty or încîdentay to some other use o thîs pubîcatîon) wîthout the wrîtten permîssîon o the copyrîght owner. Appîcatîons or the copyrîght owner’s wrîtten permîssîon to reproduce any part o thîs pubîcatîon shoud be addressed to the Unîversîty o Waes Press,  Coumbus Wak, Brîgantîne Pace, Cardî CF UP.

The vîews expressed în thîs text are those o the author, and do not necessarîy reect those o Her Majesty’s Courts and Trîbunas Servîce or the Mînîstry o Justîce.

The content o thîs pubîcatîon does not constîtute ega or other proessîona advîce, and shoud not be reîed upon as such. Whîe every reasonabe eort has been made to ensure that the content îs accurate and up to date, any reîance on the content îs soey at the user’s own rîsk.

www.uwp.co.uk

Brîtîsh Lîbrary CIP Data A cataogue record or thîs book îs avaîabe rom the Brîtîsh Lîbrary.

ISBN ---- eISBN ----

The rîghts o the Contrîbutors to be îdentîîed as authors o thîs work has been asserted în accordance wîth sectîons  and  o the Copyrîght, Desîgns and Patents Act .

Typeset by Marîe Doherty Prînted by CPI Antony Rowe, Meksham, Wîtshîre

Series Preface

or severa centurîes ater the unîon o the two countrîes under the Tudors, the F aws whîch appîed în Engand and the aws whîch appîed în Waes were amost exacty îdentîca. Athough admînîstered dîferenty în Waes by the courts o Great Sessîon, the aws were not dîferent. Ony în the nîneteenth century, barey ha a century ater the aboîtîon o the Great Sessîons în 1830, dîd aws begîn to be made or Waes whîch dîd not appy în neîghbourîng Engand. The number o such aws however remaîned sma when compared wîth those whîch were common to both countrîes. Engand and Waes was a sînge aw dîstrîct wîth a sînge aw – the aw o Engand and Waes, whîch was în reaîty Engîsh aw. Devoutîon has changed that sîtuatîon sîgnîficanty. The creatîon o the Natîona Assemby or Waes and îts subsequent acquîsîtîon o prîmary aw-makîng powers has meant that there îs now a growîng number o dîferences between the aws whîch appy în Waes and those whîch appy în Engand. Athough în the majorîty o cases, the aws o the two countrîes remaîn the same, there îs an încreas- îng dîvergence în the rues reatîng to those matters whîch have been devoved. In truth, there are now three bodîes o aw în Engand and Waes: one whîch appîes ony în Waes; a second whîch appîes ony în Engand, and a thîrd whîch appîes în both countrîes. Whenever the Natîona Assemby egîsates or Waes or the Unîted Kîngdom Parîament egîsates ony or Engand, the dîvergence încreases. As that dîvergence încreases, so does the împortance that awyers, aw students and the pubîc shoud be abe to înorm themseves o what the aw îs în Waes. Peope need to know the aws whîch govern theîr îves rom the perspectîve o the socîety în whîch they îve. In both countrîes, awyers need to know what the aw îs on eîther sîde o the border The temptatîon has been to present the aw whîch appîes în Waes în terms o the aw whîch appîes în Engand, whîe merey notîng the dîferences. As dîvergence încreases, that approach becomes not merey unhepu rom a Wesh perspectîve, but unacceptabe. The purpose o thîs serîes thereore îs to present to the proessîons and to the pubîc an account o the aw as ît appîes în Waes în the areas where there îs now dîvergence, and în so doîng to both redress the deficît and provîde the oundatîon or a ega îterature to serve the dîstînct needs o Waes.

Thomas Gyn Watkîn

To the memory o Dr Davîd Wîllîams, Judge o the Upper Trîbunal, colleague, mentor and rîend

Contents

Serîes Preace. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . îx Notes on Contrîbutors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xî Lîst o Fîgures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xîx Lîst o Tabes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxî

Introductîon: Admînîstratîve Justîce în Waes and Comparatîve Perspectîves Sarah Nason1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART 1 Welsh Legislation and Administrative Justice 1 Impîcatîons or Admînîstratîve Justîce o Waes’ Unîque Chîd Rîghts Laws Jane Wîllîams33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 The Housîng (Waes) Act: What’s Phîosophy got to do wîth ît? Helen Taylor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Admînîstratîve Justîce and the Wesh Language (Waes) Measure 2011 Catrîn Fflur Huws. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

PART 2 Welsh Commissioners and Administrative Justice 4 Language Commîssîoners and theîr Independence Dîarmaît Mac Gîolla Chríost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 5 The Chîdren’s Commîssîoner or Waes and the Oder Peope’s Commîssîoner or Waes and the Admînîstratîve Justîce System Ann Sherlock and John Wîllîams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

PART 3 Administrative Justice Within and Across the United Kingdom: New Developments in Tribunals and Ombudsmanry 6 Opportunîtîes and Constraînts: Reflectîons on Reormîng Admînîstratîve Justîce Wîthîn and Across the Unîted Kîngdom Brîan Thompson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 7 Current Deveopments în UK Trîbunas: Chaenges or Admînîstratîve Justîce Robert Thomas481................................................................

viiiPublic Law of Wales The

8

Buîdîng a Wesh Jurîsdîctîon Through Admînîstratîve Justîce Huw Prîtchard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218

PART 4 Comparative Perspectives on Administrative Justice 9 The Admînîstratîve Court and Admînîstratîve Law în Waes and Comparatîve Perspectîves Sarah Nason and Davîd Gardner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 10 The Shapîng o Federa Admînîstratîve Justîce în Begîum: Recastîng Cîtîzens–admînîstratîon Reatîonshîps Yseult Marîque.................................283............................... 11 Amagamatîon o Trîbunas în Austraîa: Whether ’tîs Better … ? Robîn Creyke316. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Admînîstratîve Justîce Wîthout Lawyers? Unrepresented Partîes în Austraîan Trîbunas Matthew Groves. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346. 13 Maîntaînîng Admînîstratîve Justîce în the Dutch Reguatory Weare State Albertjan Tollenaar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373

Seect Bîbîography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399

Foreword

he revîew o executîve actîon îs not a new concept în Waes; but the ast T fity years has seen a dramatîc încrease în pubîc scrutîny o admînîstratîve decîsîons, and the processes rom whîch they resut. Thîs has ed to ouder and ouder crîes or decîsîons o pubîc bodîes to be reconsîdered, and to a burgeonîng o ‘admînîstratîve justîce’. We have seen court chaenges to executîve decîsîons evove rom rare and exotîc flowers, to fieds whîch now domînate the work o the Queen’s Bench Dîvîsîon o the Hîgh Court and Cîvî Dîvîsîon o the Court o Appea, as we as occupyîng a trîbuna system whîch hears as many cases as a cîvî courts put together. Furthermore, în recognîtîon o the need or admînîstratîve decîsîon-makîng to be ‘good’, as we as awu, admînîstratîve decîsîon-makers have aso generay moved to adopt înterna revîew procedures, many o whîch dea wîth compaînts about the merîts o the reevant decîsîon; and, not ony has the roe o ombudsman been created, ît now hods an împortant pace în the broader admînîstratîve justîce andscape. Reflectîng where executîve power has aîn, most o these deveopments have been London-centrîc. However, over the ast ten years, thîngs have been changîng. For exampe, admînîstratîve justîce, în the narrow sense o the judîcîa adjudîcatîon o dîsputes between cîtîzens and the state, has been decentraîsed to a sîgnîficant extent, through the trîbuna system and by the openîng o Admînîstratîve Court Oices out-o-London, încudîng în Cardîf rom where the Admînîstratîve Court în Waes îs managed. About 20 per cent o Admînîstratîve Court cases are now admîn- îstered and heard out o London. However, în Waes, the changes have been much the greater because o the efects o devoutîon. Athough justîce îs not a devoved unctîon – and îs unîkey to be devoved în the îmmedîate uture, even wîth a reserved powers mode – în Waes, executîve unctîons have a dîferent backdrop, they are dîspersed dîferenty, and they are subject to încreasîngy dîferent admînîstratîve processes. Those dî- erences are beîng acceerated and accentuated by încreasîngy dîferent substantîve aw and poîcy în Waes, partîcuary în areas whîch necessarîy have a hîgh eve o admînîstratîve decîsîon-makîng, such as heath care, socîa weare and housîng. Consequenty, athough not responsîbe or the ‘justîce’ area, the Wesh Government has recognîsed that ît cannot îgnore the need or the admînîstratîve decîsîon-makîng or whîch ît îs utîmatey responsîbe to be the subject o appro- prîate revîew processes. It îs readîy apparent that processes that may be approprîate or the Unîted Kîngdom, or Engand, may not be so or Waes, gîven îts unîque characterîstîcs, or exampe, îts sîze, îts partîcuar geographîca chaenges and îts dîferent poîcy outook. The Wesh Government thereore supported research