Premium
Standards of judicial review of administrative bodies: The consideration of citizen participation
Author(s) -
Taucar Christopher Edward
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
canadian public administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.361
H-Index - 26
eISSN - 1754-7121
pISSN - 0008-4840
DOI - 10.1111/j.1754-7121.2010.00112.x
Subject(s) - deference , appeal , political science , bureaucracy , standard of review , judicial review , consistency (knowledge bases) , public participation , legislation , judicial opinion , quality (philosophy) , law , judicial deference , law and economics , sociology , politics , philosophy , geometry , mathematics , epistemology
In Canada there is little legitimate or legal room or consistency with the judicial role in judicial review of or appeal from administrative actions or decisions for courts to take into account the degree or quality of citizen participation to support greater deference for administrative decision or action. At most, this consideration may be considered a sub‐factor, marginal and never determinative. In particular, citizen participation can be a sub‐factor when the public perception is either explicitly central to the legislation in issue, or is assumed or inferred as such by the court. Nevertheless, assuming such citizen participation in bureaucracy is positive, there can be some significant indirect coincidental promotion of it in reality as a result of and through judicial deference to administrative decisions, which occurs concomitantly in standard‐of‐review analysis.