Transforming 'Fairness' as a Ground of Judicial Review in Hong Kong

International Journal of Constitutional Law (2013), Vol. 11 No. 2, 358–381

24 Pages Posted: 7 Aug 2013

Date Written: May 1, 2013

Abstract

This paper evaluates the recent development of “fairness” as a ground of judicial review by the courts in Hong Kong. This newly developed ground of fairness is significantly more far-reaching than “procedural fairness” and other existing uses of fairness in judicial review. Key innovations include: (a) the courts’ review of systemic problems with decision-making processes; (b) the extension of the courts’ review of the fairness of such processes beyond the traditional focus on, for example, the right to a hearing; and (c) the introduction of a sliding scale of review with stronger or “anxious” scrutiny of decision-making processes. The paper evaluates the need for these innovations, noting an absence of a conscious internalization of procedural standards in decision making at the executive level. The paper concludes that the ground of fairness, therefore, is a positive development of administrative law. However, in addition to the usual risk of over-judicialization of administrative process, there is a risk that the recently developed ground is too hard-edged as currently formulated. The paper, therefore, proposes the introduction of a justificatory and balancing component to its usage, similar to that used in the context of proportionality. It also proposes a clarification of the kinds of situations that would trigger the use of this stronger ground of fairness.

Keywords: Judicial Review, Constitutional Law, Public Law, Fairness, Policy, Grounds for review, Grounds of Review, Hong Kong, Human Rights, Constitutional Rights

Suggested Citation

Jhaveri, Swati, Transforming 'Fairness' as a Ground of Judicial Review in Hong Kong (May 1, 2013). International Journal of Constitutional Law (2013), Vol. 11 No. 2, 358–381, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2306854
No contact information is available for Swati Jhaveri

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
132
Abstract Views
862
Rank
390,441
PlumX Metrics