The principles of natural justice apply to a wide range of government decisions and not just to decisions of a 'judicial' character.
Whenever an Act of Parliament confers discretion on a minister, it must always be used to further the policy and objects of the Act. The courts and not ministers are the final arbiters of how an Act of Parliament should be interpreted.
The jurisdiction of the courts to review decisions of public bodies cannot be ousted by Parliament without the clearest words.
Modern developments in administrative law 'are categorically, judicial creations. They owe neither their existence nor their acceptance to the will of the legislature. They have nothing to do with the intention of the legislature, save as a fig leaf to cover their true origins.'
'The notion that judicial review rests on a set of constitutional foundations, rather than a single foundation
judicial review's legitimacy is secured
by the rich set of constitutional principles most notably the rule of law, separation of powers and the sovereignty of Parliament- on which the constitution is founded. It is on the interaction of those fundamentals
that the justification for judicial review is to be found.'
'No one is so innocent to suppose that judicial creativity does not form the grounds of judicial review; but by adhering to the doctrine of ultra vires the judiciary shows that it adheres to its proper constitutional position and that it recognises that Parliament is free to dispense with the judicially developed principles of judicial review.'
'The fact that the legislature could ultimately limit review, given the traditional notions of sovereignty, does not mean that the institution of review has to be legitimised by reference to legislative intent in the absence of any such limit being imposed.'
The decision maker must understand correctly the law that regulates his decision-making power and must give effect to it.
It applies to a decision so outrageous in its defiance of logic or of accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.
Covers both the rules of natural justice and procedural rules laid down by legislation.