This is a lively collection of essays by an internationally distinguished group of the world's most respected administrative lawyers. It is a timely work as public law in the United Kingdom is at an extremely interesting stage in its long development. A period of unprecedented expansion in the judicial review jurisdiction and the growing legal impact of membership of the European Community provide an incentive to reflect upon and consolidate existing learning, and assess how public law doctrine and scholarship will progress into the new millenium. There has also been a recent burgeoning of theoretical public law scholarship and the development of more critical and socio-legal approaches to the subject of law and administration. This book takes account of all these factors, and also reflects the international dimension of administrative law issues. The essays are written in honour of Sir Wlliam Wade, who was Professor of English at St John's College Oxford, Rouse Ball Professor of English Law at the University of Cambridge and Master of Gonville and Caius College Cambridge. He is one of the leading scholars of his generation and is justly credited for having contributed hugely to the development of administrative law in Britain through his text Administrative Law (OUP) but also through the Hamlyn lectures and through his work as a member of the English bar, his lectures throughout the world and numerous articles, notes and essays.

Wade and Forsyth's Administrative Law has been a cornerstone text since publication of the firstedition in 1961. It provides a comprehensive and perceptive account of the principles of judicialreview and the administrative arrangements of the United Kingdom. For over sixty years,this text has been trusted by students and is extensively cited by courts throughout the common law world.The book's clarity of exposition makes it accessible to students approaching the subjectfor the first time, whilst its breadth of coverage and perceptive insight ensure its value to allinterested in the field, academics and practitioners alike.

The use and scope of judicial review of government action has transformed across the common law world over the last forty years. This volume takes stock of the transformation, bringing together over 30 leading figures from academia and practice to analyse the major issues surrounding the legal reforms from theoretical and comparative perspectives.Coverage in the book spans the theoretical foundations of judicial review; the scope and functions of administrative justice; the conditions of judicial independence; recurring problems in legal doctrine; and issues in legal procedure. A final set of essays presents case studies of the experiences of reforming judicial review in different countries, including an extended section on judicial review in China.

This collection of essays presents opposing sides of the debate over the foundations of judicial review. In this work,however, the discussion of whether the 'ultra vires' doctrine is best characterised as a central principle of administrative law or as a harmless, justificatory fiction is located in the highly topical and political context of constitutional change. The thorough jurisprudential analysis of the relative merits of models of 'legislative intention' and 'judicial creativity' provides a sound base for consideration of the constitutional problems arising out of legislative devolution and the Human Rights Act 1998. As the historical orthodoxy is challenged by growing institutional independence, leading figures in the field offer competing perspectives on the future of judicial review. "Confucius was wrong to say that it is a curse to live in interesting times. We are witnessing the development of a constitutional philosophy which recognises fundamental values and gives them effect in the mediation of law to the people".(Sir John Laws) ContributorsNick Bamforth, Paul Craig, David Dyzenhaus, Mark Elliott, David Feldman, Christopher Forsyth, Brigid Hadfield, Jeffrey Jowell QC, Sir John Laws, Dawn Oliver, Sir Stephen Sedley, Mark Walters. With short responses by: TRS Allan, Stephen Bailey, Robert Carnworth, Martin Loughlin, Michael Taggart, Sir William Wade.

This collection of essays presents opposing sides of the debate over the foundations of judicial review. In this work,however, the discussion of whether the ''ultra vires'' doctrine is best characterised as a central principle of administrative law or as a harmless, justificatory fiction is located in the highly topical and political context of constitutional change. The thorough jurisprudential analysis of the relative merits of models of ''legislative intention'' and ''judicial creativity'' provides a sound base for consideration of the constitutional problems arising out of legislative devolution and the Human Rights Act 1998. As the historical orthodoxy is challenged by growing institutional independence, leading figures in the field offer competing perspectives on the future of judicial review. “Confucius was wrong to say that it is a curse to live in interesting times. We are witnessing the development of a constitutional philosophy which recognises fundamental values and gives them effect in the mediation of law to the people”. (Sir John Laws)ContributorsNick Bamforth, Paul Craig, David Dyzenhaus, Mark Elliott, David Feldman, Christopher Forsyth, Brigid Hadfield, Jeffrey Jowell QC, Sir John Laws, Dawn Oliver, Sir Stephen Sedley, Mark Walters. With short responses by: TRS Allan, Stephen Bailey, Robert Carnworth, Martin Loughlin, Michael Taggart, Sir William Wade.

This is a lively collection of essays by an internationally distinguished group of the world's most respected administrative lawyers. It is a timely work as public law in the United Kingdom is at an extremely interesting stage in its long development. A period of unprecedented expansion in the judicial review jurisdiction and the growing legal impact of membership of the European Community provide an incentive to reflect upon and consolidate existing learning, and assess how public law doctrine and scholarship will progress into the new millenium. There has also been a recent burgeoning of theoretical public law scholarship and the development of more critical and socio-legal approaches to the subject of law and administration. This book takes account of all these factors, and also reflects the international dimension of administrative law issues. The essays are written in honour of Sir Wlliam Wade, who was Professor of English at St John's College Oxford, Rouse Ball Professor of English Law at the University of Cambridge and Master of Gonville and Caius College Cambridge. He is one of the leading scholars of his generation and is justly credited for having contributed hugely to the development of administrative law in Britain through his text Administrative Law (OUP) but also through the Hamlyn lectures and through his work as a member of the English bar, his lectures throughout the world and numerous articles, notes and essays.

Wade and Forsyth's Administrative Law has been a cornerstone text since publication of the firstedition in 1961. It provides a comprehensive and perceptive account of the principles of judicialreview and the administrative arrangements of the United Kingdom. For over sixty years,this text has been trusted by students and is extensively cited by courts throughout the common law world.The book's clarity of exposition makes it accessible to students approaching the subjectfor the first time, whilst its breadth of coverage and perceptive insight ensure its value to allinterested in the field, academics and practitioners alike.

The use and scope of judicial review of government action has transformed across the common law world over the last forty years. This volume takes stock of the transformation, bringing together over 30 leading figures from academia and practice to analyse the major issues surrounding the legal reforms from theoretical and comparative perspectives.Coverage in the book spans the theoretical foundations of judicial review; the scope and functions of administrative justice; the conditions of judicial independence; recurring problems in legal doctrine; and issues in legal procedure. A final set of essays presents case studies of the experiences of reforming judicial review in different countries, including an extended section on judicial review in China.

This collection of essays presents opposing sides of the debate over the foundations of judicial review. In this work,however, the discussion of whether the 'ultra vires' doctrine is best characterised as a central principle of administrative law or as a harmless, justificatory fiction is located in the highly topical and political context of constitutional change. The thorough jurisprudential analysis of the relative merits of models of 'legislative intention' and 'judicial creativity' provides a sound base for consideration of the constitutional problems arising out of legislative devolution and the Human Rights Act 1998. As the historical orthodoxy is challenged by growing institutional independence, leading figures in the field offer competing perspectives on the future of judicial review. "Confucius was wrong to say that it is a curse to live in interesting times. We are witnessing the development of a constitutional philosophy which recognises fundamental values and gives them effect in the mediation of law to the people".(Sir John Laws) ContributorsNick Bamforth, Paul Craig, David Dyzenhaus, Mark Elliott, David Feldman, Christopher Forsyth, Brigid Hadfield, Jeffrey Jowell QC, Sir John Laws, Dawn Oliver, Sir Stephen Sedley, Mark Walters. With short responses by: TRS Allan, Stephen Bailey, Robert Carnworth, Martin Loughlin, Michael Taggart, Sir William Wade.

This collection of essays presents opposing sides of the debate over the foundations of judicial review. In this work,however, the discussion of whether the ''ultra vires'' doctrine is best characterised as a central principle of administrative law or as a harmless, justificatory fiction is located in the highly topical and political context of constitutional change. The thorough jurisprudential analysis of the relative merits of models of ''legislative intention'' and ''judicial creativity'' provides a sound base for consideration of the constitutional problems arising out of legislative devolution and the Human Rights Act 1998. As the historical orthodoxy is challenged by growing institutional independence, leading figures in the field offer competing perspectives on the future of judicial review. “Confucius was wrong to say that it is a curse to live in interesting times. We are witnessing the development of a constitutional philosophy which recognises fundamental values and gives them effect in the mediation of law to the people”. (Sir John Laws)ContributorsNick Bamforth, Paul Craig, David Dyzenhaus, Mark Elliott, David Feldman, Christopher Forsyth, Brigid Hadfield, Jeffrey Jowell QC, Sir John Laws, Dawn Oliver, Sir Stephen Sedley, Mark Walters. With short responses by: TRS Allan, Stephen Bailey, Robert Carnworth, Martin Loughlin, Michael Taggart, Sir William Wade.