Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Editorial Committee of the Cambridge Law Journal, Cambridge University Press are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Cambridge Law
Journal
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Cambridge Law Journal, 46(1), March 1987, pp. 53-82
Printed in Great Britain
G. L. Peiris*
I. Introduction
53
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
54 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
6 Sec A. C. Hutchinson, "The Rise and Ruse of Administrative Law and Scholarship" (1985) 48
M.L.R. 193: cf. R. M. Unger. "The Critical Legal Studies Movement" (1983) 96 Harv. L.Rev.
561.
7 0. Fiss, "Objectivity and Interpretation" (1982) Stan. L.Rev. 739 at p. 745.
8 See, e.g.. R. v. Secretary of State for Transport, ex p. Greater London Council 11985] 3 W.L.R.
574.
9 R. v. Secretary of State for the Environment, ex p. Nottinghamshire County Council [ 1986] A.C.
240 at pp. 250-251, per Lord Scarman: Re Westminster City Council 11986] 2 W.L.R. 807 at
p. 830, per Lord Tcmpleman; R. v. Secretary of State for Social Services, ex p. Association of
Metropolitan Authorities 119861 1 W.L.R. I at p. 6, per Webster J.
t0 R. v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex p. Preston 119851 A.C. 835: Wheeler v. Leicester City
Counci [ 19851 A.C. 1054: Gillick v. West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority 119861 A.C.
112.
119483 1 K.B. 223.
12 At p. 229.
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 55
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
56 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 57
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
58 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 59
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
60 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
49 W.,s.ll9(l).
50 [1961] A.C. 636 atp. 675.
51 Ibid.
52 Hoveringham Gravets Ltd. v. Secretary of State for the Environment [1975] 1 Q.B. 754 at p. 764,
per Orr L.J; c/. at p. 771, per Scarman LJ. (C.A.).
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 61
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
62 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
The straws are in the wind, and these restrained judiciai att
appear to be on the verge of a dramatic transformation. Incr
boldness in subjecting to scrutiny the substantive co
administrative decisions is a feature of the current renaissance of
administrative law. The results of this development are sometimes
disquieting, and the methods of reasoning used by the courts are not
always of impeccable validity. It is worth examining the major
conceptual levers which judges have deployed in recent years in their
strenuous efforts to extend the borders of their jurisdiction.
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 63
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
64 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 65
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
66 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 67
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
68 The Cambridge Law Journal [19871
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 69
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
70 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
(c) Estoppel
A principle analogous to estoppel is beginning
index of applicability of the Wednesbury rule.
The setting in which the House of Lords has rec
method of distending the scope of administrative
concerns a representation by the lnland Re
discontinuance of an inquiry in consideration of waiv
benefits claimed by the assessee. In R. v. lnland Revenue
Commissioners, ex p. Preston3 in response to a statement by an
official of the lnland Revenue that he did not intend to proceed with
his investigation if the taxpayer abandoned certain claims for interest
relief and capital loss, the latter withdrew the claims and paid capital
gains tax on a transaction which the official had been examining.
However, as a sequel to the receipt of new information relating to this
transaction, the lnland Revenue Commissioners, having concluded
that the taxpayer had received from the transaction a benefit which
was liable to taxation, issued the taxpayer with a request for further
particulars and in due course gave him formal notification initiating the
statutory procedure4 for cancellation of a tax advantage. By the time
this development took place, a statutory time-bar prevented the
taxpayer from making good his claim for relief in respect of capital
gains tax on the sale price of the shares in question, and he argued,
accordingly, that the correspondence containing the conditional offer
by the Revenue as to termination of the pending investigation
constituted a binding legal agreement which estopped the Revenue
from raising inquiries on any matters covered by the correspondence.
The basic issue in the judiciai review proceedings instituted by the
assessee was whether the conduct of the Revenue was characterised by
R. v. Secretary of State for Social Services, exp. Association of Metropolitan Authorities [1986] 1
W.L.R. 1.
Re Westminster City Council [1986] 2 W.L.R. 807 at pp. 822-823, per Lord Bridge.
[1985] A.C. 835 (H.L.).
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970, s.460.
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 71
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
72 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 73
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
74 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 75
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
76 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 11
R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, exp. Broom [1986] Q.B. 198.
Ibid., at p. 208, per Kennedy J.
R. v. Deputy Governor of Camphill Prison, exp. King [1985] Q.B. 735.
Prison Rules 1964 (S.I. 1964 No. 388), r.47(7).
[1985] Q.B. 735 at p. 752, per Griffiths L.J.
Rent Act 1968, s.72.
R. v. Barnet and Camden Rent Tribunal, ex p. Frey Investments Ltd. [1972] 2 Q.B. 342.
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
78 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 79
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
80 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
Chief Constable ofthe North Wales Police v. Evans [1982] 1 W.L.R. 115
Hailsham of St. Marylcbonc L.C.
[1985] A.C 1054 (H.L.).
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
C.L.J. Wednesbury Unreasonableness 81
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
82 The Cambridge Law Journal [1987]
174.
66 Ibid., atp
67 /fc/rf.,atp 189.
68 Ibid., atp 194.
69 Ibid., atp 197; c/. Lord Templeman at pp. 200-201.
70 Ibid., atp 197.
71 Ibid, atp 202, per Lord Templeman.
72 /&M., atp. 192, per Lord Bridge of Harwich.
This content downloaded from 109.173.219.212 on Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:46:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms