Ouster clauses, separation of powers and the intention of parliament: from Anisminic to Privacy International

Robert J T Craig

Ouster clauses, separation of powers and the intention of parliament: from Anisminic to Privacy International

Robert J T Craig^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

15 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Reflects on the constitutional implications of ouster clauses, especially regarding separation of powers. Discusses the approach adopted in Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission (HL), the case's subsequent application, and the impact of R. (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal (CA). Considers whether a distinction should be drawn between clauses addressed to judicial and administrative bodies.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	570-584
Journal	Public Law
Volume	4
Publication status	Published - 1 Nov 2018

Keywords

Judicial review
Legislative intention
Ouster clauses
Separation of powers

Access to Document

Full-text PDF (author’s accepted manuscript)
This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Sweet and Maxwell at https://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/Catalogue/ProductDetails.aspx?productid=7106&recordid=469 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Accepted author manuscript, 200 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/ID53EA620B7B011E8AC35D6541799292D/View/FullText.html

Cite this

@article{b718434e264344f7aba0239e917ae5af,

title = "Ouster clauses, separation of powers and the intention of parliament: from Anisminic to Privacy International",

abstract = "Reflects on the constitutional implications of ouster clauses, especially regarding separation of powers. Discusses the approach adopted in Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission (HL), the case's subsequent application, and the impact of R. (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal (CA). Considers whether a distinction should be drawn between clauses addressed to judicial and administrative bodies.",

keywords = "Judicial review, Legislative intention, Ouster clauses, Separation of powers",

author = "Craig, {Robert J T}",

year = "2018",

month = nov,

day = "1",

language = "English",

volume = "4",

pages = "570--584",

journal = "Public Law",

issn = "0033-3565",

publisher = "Sweet and Maxwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ouster clauses, separation of powers and the intention of parliament

T2 - from Anisminic to Privacy International

AU - Craig, Robert J T

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Reflects on the constitutional implications of ouster clauses, especially regarding separation of powers. Discusses the approach adopted in Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission (HL), the case's subsequent application, and the impact of R. (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal (CA). Considers whether a distinction should be drawn between clauses addressed to judicial and administrative bodies.

AB - Reflects on the constitutional implications of ouster clauses, especially regarding separation of powers. Discusses the approach adopted in Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission (HL), the case's subsequent application, and the impact of R. (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal (CA). Considers whether a distinction should be drawn between clauses addressed to judicial and administrative bodies.

KW - Judicial review

KW - Legislative intention

KW - Ouster clauses

KW - Separation of powers

M3 - Article (Academic Journal)

VL - 4

SP - 570

EP - 584

JO - Public Law

JF - Public Law

SN - 0033-3565

ER -

Ouster clauses, separation of powers and the intention of parliament: from Anisminic to Privacy International

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this