Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T03:28:41.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Administrative Review: Beyond the Frontier Marked “Policy—Lawyers Keep Out”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2025

M. D. Kirby
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

By a review of a series of comparable decisions in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) some of the problems that may arise as the jurisdiction and role of the AAT continues to expand in the review on the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions are identified. The problems include first, the apparent difficulty for democratic theory of unelected tribunal members (including persons who are also judges) reviewing policy determined by elected Ministers; secondly, the creation of a dichotomy between decisions made by the AAT and decisions of public servants faithfully and more consistently applying Ministerial policy; thirdly, the limitation upon the membership and procedures of the AAT which restrict any truly effective wide-ranging review of government policy; and, fourthly, the potential damage to community confidence in the judiciary, by the involvement of judges in the frank determination of controversial matters of public policy. The role of policy-making in the courts is acknowledged and similarities and differences in the function of the courts and the AAT in the review of policy issues are indicated. It is concluded that the AAT will require all arms of government in Australia to face more precisely the role of policy in adjudicative decision-making.

Type
Review Article
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1981 , pp. 121 - 157
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 The Australian National University

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

See Wade, “Law, Opinion and Administration” (1962) 78 L.Q.R. 188, 202.

**

The views expressed are the author's personal views only.

References

1 Wade, , “Law, Opinion and Administration” (1962) 78 L.Q.R. 188, 189, 202Google Scholar.

2 Id. 189.

3 Ibid.

4 Lord, Devlin, Address to the Bentham Society (1956)Google Scholar, cited Wade, , op. cit. 194Google Scholar.

5 Davis, , “The Future of Judge-Made Public Law in England: A Problem of Practical Jurisprudence” (1961) 61 Columbia Law Review 201, 216CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Wade, , op. cit. 201Google Scholar.

7 Id. 202.

8 Wade, , Constitutional Fundamentals (1980)Google Scholar; reviewed and criticised, Winterton, , “Parliamentary Supremacy and the Judiciary” (1981) 97 L.Q.R. 265Google Scholar; Harlow, , “Politics and Principles: Some Rival Theories of Administrative Law” (1981) 44 Modern Law Review 113Google Scholar.

9 [1964] A.C. 40.

10 Taylor, , “The New Administrative Law” (1977) 51 A.L.J. 804Google Scholar.

11 Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) (commenced October 1980).

12 Law Reform Commission of Canada: Seventh Annual Report (1977-1978) 14.

13 Drake v. Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1'979) 24 A.L.R. 577;2 A.L.D. 60. See also Case Note (1980) 11 F.L. Rev. 93.

14 The expression was first used in Re Becker and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1977) 15 A.L.R. 696, 699-700; 1 A.L.D. 158, 161. In Drake (supra n. 13) the Federal Court adapted the expression slightly to “the correct or preferable” decision: (1979) 24 A.L.R. 577, 589; 2 A.L.D. 60, 68.

15 Reid, , “The Changing Political Framework”, Quadrant, (1980) No. 150, Vol. 24, 5, 12Google Scholar.

16 The judiciary is here referred to in a wide sense. Judges sit in the AAT as presidential members, although not as judges. They are personae designatae. The position is explained by Bowen, C.J. Deane, J. in Drake (1979) 2 A.L.D. 60, 63-65Google Scholar.

17 Committee on Administrative Tribunals and Enquiries: Report (1957) (U.K.).

18 Griffith, , “Tribunals and Inquiries” (1959) 22 Modern Law Review 125, 143CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Else–Mitchell, , “The Place of the Administrative Tribunal in 1965”, in Woodman, (ed.), Record of the Third Commonwealth and Empire Law Conference (1966) 65Google Scholar.

20 Victorian Statute Law Revision Committee: Appeals from Administrative Decisions and a Proposal for an Office of Ombudsman (1968) para. 36.

21 New South Wales Law Reform Commission: Right of Appeal from Decisions of Administrative Tribunals and Officers L.R.C. 16 (1973) 70.

22 Id. 101. Draft Bill, sub-cl. 26(1).

23 Id. 101. Draft Bill, sub-cl. 26(5). See also id. 158.

24 Id. 105.

25 Id. Draft Bill, sub-ell. 32(3) and (4).

26 Id. 159.

27 Wilenski, Directions for Change, Interim Report of the Committee of Inquiry into N.S.W. Government Administration. The final report is expected late in 1981.

28 The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, Working Paper and Survey: Review of Administrative Decisions, Part I—Appeals (1978) para. 4.9.

29 Id. para. 4.11.

30 Id. para. 4.17.

31 Commonwealth Administrative Review Committee: Report (1971) (the Kerr Report).

32 Id. para. 300.

33 Ibid.

34 Id. para. 299.

35 Id. para. 293.

36 Committee on Administrative Discretions: Final Report (1973) (the Bland Report).

37 Id. para. 172(e).

38 Id. para. 172(g)(iii).

39 Id. para. 149.

40 H.R. Deb. 1975, Vol. 93, 1187.

41 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), s. 43(1).

42 (1979) 2 A.L.D. 60.

43 Id. 69-70.

44 Re Becker and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1977) 15 A.L.R. 696, 701; 1 A.L.D. 158, 162.

45 (1977) 15 A.LR. 696, 701; 1 AL.D. 158, 163.

46 Pearce, , “Courts, Tribunals and Government Policy” (1980) 11 F.L. Rev. 203, 219-220Google Scholar.

47 The policy was changed in January 1980. The change is discussed by Smithers J. in Re Gungor and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 30 May 1980, unreported decision of Smithers J.). An appeal to the Federal Court was heard in June 1981. Decision reserved. There have been deportation decisions in the AAT involving illegal drug convictions other than those reviewed in this paper. Among the reported decisions not reviewed are Re Ajamian and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 A.L.D. 366 (N.); Re Alkan and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 A.L.D. 361 (N.); Re Habchi and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 A.L.D. 623; Re Kiely and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 A.L.D. 159; Re Malekas and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 A.L.D. 547 (N.); Re Pochi and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 A.L.D. 33; Re Sergi and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 A.L.D. 224.

48 Re Drake and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (No. 2) (1979) 2 A.L.D. 634, 640.

49 Id. 642-643.

50 Id. 643.

51 Id. 644.

52 Ibid.

53 Id. 645.

54 (1979) 2 A.L.D. 634.

55 (1979) 24 A.L.R. 577; 2 A.L.D. 60, 85.

56 Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 30 May 1980, unreported decision of Smithers J.

57 Id. 20.

58 Id. 23.

59 Id. 24.

60 Id. 24-25.

61 Id. 29.

62 Id. 32.

63 Id. 28.

64 Drake v. Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 24 A.L.R. 577, 591; 2 A.L.D. 60, 70.

65 (1980) 2 A.L.D. 891.

66 Id. 902.

67 Ibid.

68 Id. 903.

69 (1980) 3 A.L.N. No. 9.

70 Id. 12.

71 Id. 14.

72 Re Gungor and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 30 May 1980, unreported decision of Smithers J.), 26.

73 Re Gallo and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1980) 3 A.L.N. No. 9.

74 (1980) 3 A.L.D. 1.

75 In the unreported transcript of the full decision in Saverio Barbaro, 31.

76 (1980) 3 A.L.D. 1, 10.

77 (1979) 2 A.L.D. 224 (Davies J.). See now Kuswardana v. Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1981) 35 A.L.R. 186.

78 (1980) 3 A.L.D. 1, 12.

79 Id. 17.

80 (1980) 3 A.L.N. No. 7.

81 Id. official transcript 23-24.

82 (1980) 3 A.L.N. No. 11.

83 Id. official transcript 28.

84 Id. official transcript 28-29, 30-31.

85 (1980) 3 A.L.N. N.o. 6.

86 Id. official transcript 34.

87 Id. official transcript 35.

88 Id. official transcript 33.

89 (1981) 3 A.L.N. No. 21.

90 Id. official transcript 7.

91 (1980) 3 A.L.N. No. 7.

92 (1981) 3 A.L.N. No. 21.

93 (1980) 3 A.L.N. No. 7.

94 Kirby, , “Administrative Review on the Merits: The Right or Preferable Decision” (1980) 6 Monash University Law Review 171, 174-180Google Scholar.

95 Collector of Customs (N.S.W.) v. Brian Lawlor Automotive Pty Ltd (1978) 2 A.L.D. 1, 31, per Deane J. (dissenting).

96 Katz, ;, “Australian Federal Administrative Law Reform” (1980) 58 Canadian Bar Review 341, 349Google Scholar.

97 (1979) 2 A.L.D. 634, 644.

98 (1980) Commonwealth Conference of Delegated Legislation Committees, Vol. 3, 1, 5.

99 Reid, , “The Changing Political Framework”, Quadrant (1980) No. 150, Vol. 24, 5, 12Google Scholar. I do not overlook the limitations of the responsibility theory in the case of Ministers. Triennial electoral accountability is a remote means of enforcing ministerial answerability for devising and administering particular policies in particular cases. But it is a greater accountability than can usually exist in respect of an independent tribunal.

1 Kerr Report, op. cit. para. 299.

2 Bland Report, op. cit. para. 172(g)(iii). A similar point is made by E. J. L., Tucker (Chairman of the ARC), “Implications of External Review of Policy Decisions”, mimeo, February 1981, 12Google Scholar.

3 Kirby, , op. cit. 179-180Google Scholar.

4 Pearce, , “Courts, Tribunals and Government Policy” (1980) 11 F.L. Rev. 203Google Scholar.

5 Id. 212-213.

6 Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Ply Ltd v. Commonwealth of Australia (1977) 139 C.L.R. 54. Cf. R. v. Anderson; Ex parte Ipee–Air Pty Ltd (1965) 113 C.L.R. 177. See discussion in Pearce, , op. cit. 210-213Google Scholar.

7 Pearce, , op. cit, 214Google Scholar.

8 Kerr Report, op. cit. para. 293.

9 Australian Administrative Review Council, Second Annual Report (1978) para. 63(e).

10 Kerr Report, op. cit. para. 292.

11 Mclnerney, , “The Appointment of Judges to Commissions of Inquiry and Other Extra-Judicial Activities” (1978) 52 A.L.J. 540Google Scholar; Connor, , “The Use of Judges in Non-Judicial Roles” (1978) 52 A.L.J. 482Google Scholar; Brennan, , “Limits on the Use of Judges” (1978) 9 F.L. Rev. 1Google Scholar.

12 Reid, , “The Changing Political Framework”, Quadrant (1980) No. 150, Vol. 24, 5, 12Google Scholar.

13 Id. 14.

14 King, , “The Role of the Judiciary in Relation to Public Administration” (1980) 39 Australian Journal of Public Administration 1, 16-17CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Stone, , Social Dimensions of Law and Justice (1966) 654-655Google Scholar.

16 Sir Harry Gibbs, Address at the Ceremonial Sitting on the Occasion of his Swearing in as Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, mimeo, 12 February 1981. To similar effect, Brennan, , “Ministers of the Third Branch of Government”, mimeo, unpublished address, May 1981, 9Google Scholar.

17 E.g. Else-Mitchell, “Administrative Law”, in Spann, (ed.), Public Administration in Australia (1915) 213, 293Google Scholar.

18 The application by the Minister for special leave to appeal to the High Court was refused on 30 July 1979.

19 E.g. Stone, , Legal System and Lawyers' Reasonings (1964) Chs 6-8Google Scholar.

20 Lord, Reid, “The Judge as Lawmaker” (1972-1973) 12 Journal of Society of Public Teachers of Law, 22Google Scholar (“There was a time when it was thought almost indecent to suggest that judges make law-they only declare it. Those with a taste for fairy tales seem to have thought that in some Aladdin's cave there is hidden the Common Law in all its splendour.... But we do not believe in fairy tales any more”). Cf. faird, Devlin, “The Judge as Lawmaker”, in The Judge (1979) 1Google Scholar; Wade, , “Constitutional Fundamentals”, The Hamlyn Lectures, Thirty-second series (1980) 75Google Scholar.

21 E.g. Spartan Steel and Alloys Ltd v. Martin & Co. [1973] Q.B. 27, per Lord Denning M.R.

22 E.g. Rickards v. Lothian [1913] A.C. 263, 280; Miller v. Jackson [1977] Q.B. 966; and discussion of these and other cases by Pannick, “Of Hard and Easy Cases”, in Encounter, February-March 1981, Vol. 56, 50, 54-55.

23 State Government Insurance Commission (S.A.) v. Trigwell (1979) 53 A.LJ.R. 656, 661; (1979) 26 A.LR. 67, 78 per Mason J. See to similar effect Farrell v. Alexander [1976] 1 Q.B. 345, 371, per Scarman LJ. (as he then was).

24 State Government Insurance Commission (S.A.) v. Trigwell (1979) 53 A.L.J.R. 656, 657; (1979) 26 A.LR. 67, 70, per Barwick C.J.

25 Dugan v. Mirror Newspapers (1978) 53 A.L.J.R. 166; 22 A.LR. 439.

26 Australian Conservation Foundation Inc. v. The Commonwealth (1980) 54 A.L.J.R. 176; 28 A.LR. 257. Cf. Ingram v. The Commonwealth (1980) 54 A.L.J.R. 395.

27 Mcinnis v. R. (1979) 54 A.L.J.R. 122; 27 A.LR. 449.

28 Federal Commissioner of Taxation v. Westraders Pty Ltd (1980) 54 A.L.J.R. 460; 30 A.L.R. 353.

29 R. v. O'Connor (1980) 54 A.LJ.R. 349; 29 A.L.R. 449.

30 See Stephen, J. and Mason, J. in Australian Conservation Foundation v. The Commonwealth (1980) 54 A.L.J.R. 176, 185, 189-190Google Scholar.

31 Murphy J. dissented in Dugan v. Mirror Newspapers (1978) 53 A.LJ.R. 166; A.L.R. 439; Australian Conservation Foundation Inc. v. The Commonwealth (1980) 54 A.LJ.R. 176; 28 A.L.R. 257; Mcinnis v. R. (1979) 54 A.L.J.R. 122; 27 A.L.R. 449; and Federal Commissioner of Taxation v. Westraders Pty Ltd (1980) 54 AL.J.R. 460; 30 A.LR. 353.

32 (1979) 53 A.L.J.R. 11.

33 (1981) 55 A.L.J.R. 45.

34 Pannick, op. cit.; cf. Lord, Scarman, “The Common Law Judge and the Twentieth Century-Happy Marriage or Irretrievable Breakdown?” (1980) 7 Monash University Law Review 1Google Scholar.

35 Dairy Industry Stabilization Act 1977 (Cth), s. llA.

36 Cf. Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), para. 29(1) (a), s. 102(3).

37 Broadcasting and Television Act 1942 (Cth), s. 81(2).

38 Id. s. 119A(3).

39 Brennan, op. cit.

40 Bentham, , cited in Pannick, op. cit. 59Google Scholar.