Tribunals and administrative policies: Does the high or low policy distinction help?
Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Edgar, Andrew | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-11-27T05:36:00Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-11-27T05:36:00Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | en_AU |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2123/33331 | |
dc.description.abstract | The Australian administrative law literature identifies a number of factors for allocating weight to administrative policies by merits review tribunals. The primary consideration is the distinction between high policies, those made at the ministerial level, and low policies, those made at the departmental level. This article questions whether the high or low policy distinction assists in allocating weight to administrative policies. It argues that the distinction is problematic and that the scope of flexibility when applying policies should be assessed primarily by reference to considerations drawn from the particular regulatory context. | en_AU |
dc.language.iso | en | en_AU |
dc.publisher | Thomson Reuters | en_AU |
dc.relation.ispartof | Australian Journal of Administrative Law | en_AU |
dc.rights | Copyright All Rights Reserved | en_AU |
dc.subject | merits review tribunals | en_AU |
dc.subject | administrative policies | en_AU |
dc.subject | ministerial policies | en_AU |
dc.subject | departmental policies | en_AU |
dc.subject | problematic distinction | en_AU |
dc.subject | regulatory context | en_AU |
dc.title | Tribunals and administrative policies: Does the high or low policy distinction help? | en_AU |
dc.type | Article | en_AU |
dc.type.pubtype | Publisher's version | en_AU |
dc.rights.other | This article was published by Thomson Reuters and should be cited as Edgar, A. (2009). Tribunals and administrative policies : does the high or low policy distinction help? Australian Journal of Administrative Law, 16(3), 143–156. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase. This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited. PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039. legal.thomsonreuters.com.au | en_AU |
usyd.faculty | SeS faculties schools::The University of Sydney Law School | en_AU |
usyd.citation.volume | 16 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.issue | 3 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.spage | 143 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.epage | 156 | en_AU |
workflow.metadata.only | No | en_AU |
Associated file/s
Associated collections