9. Errors of law and control of fact finding

2区 法学 Q1 Social Sciences
Timothy Endicott
{"title":"9. Errors of law and control of fact finding","authors":"Timothy Endicott","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780198714507.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Administrative authorities deciding someone’s legal position must determine what the law is, and find the facts, and apply the law to the facts. This chapter asks how the courts control the exercise of power involved in each of those three elements of the application of the law. The chapter explains the famous decision of the House of Lords in the Anisminic case, and explains why that decision does not support the doctrine of ‘review for error of law’, which is commonly thought to have been established in Anisminic. The chapter explains why a power to apply the law is a discretionary power and concludes with a discussion of the fundamental union (downplayed and sometimes denied by the judges) between judicial review for error of law and other forms of control of discretionary power.","PeriodicalId":51730,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Law Review","volume":"118 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780198714507.003.0009","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Administrative authorities deciding someone’s legal position must determine what the law is, and find the facts, and apply the law to the facts. This chapter asks how the courts control the exercise of power involved in each of those three elements of the application of the law. The chapter explains the famous decision of the House of Lords in the Anisminic case, and explains why that decision does not support the doctrine of ‘review for error of law’, which is commonly thought to have been established in Anisminic. The chapter explains why a power to apply the law is a discretionary power and concludes with a discussion of the fundamental union (downplayed and sometimes denied by the judges) between judicial review for error of law and other forms of control of discretionary power.
9. 法律错误与事实认定的控制
行政机关确定某人的法律地位,必须确定法律是什么,找到事实,适用法律于事实。本章探讨法院如何控制在这三个法律适用要素中所涉及的权力的行使。这一章解释了上议院在Anisminic案件中著名的决定,并解释了为什么该决定不支持“法律错误审查”的原则,这一原则通常被认为是在Anisminic中建立的。这一章解释了为什么适用法律的权力是一种自由裁量权,最后讨论了对法律错误的司法审查和对自由裁量权的其他形式的控制之间的基本结合(有时被法官淡化,有时被否认)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信