Legitimate Expectations Flashcards
(7 cards)
categories of protection
procedural protection of procedural legitimate expectation
- expect a particular procedure
- prior commitment
- past practice (of consultation,
procedural expectaion of substantive protection:
- not just expectation for procedure but expectation of certain outcome.
- court requires certain procedure before the expectation fulfilled.
substantive protection of substantive legitimate expectation
- (more controversial) -
CASE AUTHORITY
Substantive legitimate expectations:
ex parte Couchlan [2001]
- main authority
- was promised if she moved to the care home she would have a home for life in this particular care home - 5 years later it was closing down.
3 ways legitimate expectations can be protected:
- say it is a relevant consideration and apply regular wednesbury grounds
- procedural protection (consultation, unless overriding reason)
- SUBSTANTIVE EXPECTATION TEST: a legitimate expectation cannot be frustrated if to do so ould be so unfair that to take a new and different course would be an abuse of power (this involves balancing fairness against overriding interest of changed policy)
- 3 requirements
substantive legitimate expectation test
ex parte Coughlin [2001]
- cannot frustrate legitimate expectation if it would lead to abuse of power (must be balanced on fairness of party and interest of changing the decision
3 requirements for this:
1) promise is very important
2) promise was made to select few people
3) consequences of holding authority to promise are likely to be financial only.
Paponette v AG of Trinidad and Topego
- subject to proportionality test
In the Finucane Case [2019]
- it was held yes it passed the 3 step threshold but on balancing did not outweigh the public interest.
political legitimate expectations?
Wheeler v Prime Minister [2008]
- if too political the courts will not intervene
- was about a promise for a referendum that didn’t happen.
Express Assurance
where express assurance of some promise was made:
Bancoult TEST:
- promise must be clear, unambiguous, and devoid of relevant qualification
Paponette:
- assessed whether reasonably understood by those to whom the promise was made.
absence of express assurance
R (Davies) v HMRC:
- practice must be so:
- unambiguous
- widespread
- well-established
- well recognised
as to carry commitment of a group.
Legitimate Expectation of Limited Resources?
R (Bibi) v Newham Council
- award of sof substantive remedy is unlikely when assurance had been given to C about granting of limited resources.
