Show Summary Details
Page of

(p. 43) 2. The rule of law and the rule of judges 

(p. 43) 2. The rule of law and the rule of judges
(p. 43) 2. The rule of law and the rule of judges

Timothy Endicott

Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD LAW TROVE ( © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Law Trove for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 09 December 2019

At common law, the judges will hold administrative conduct to be unlawful on any of three grounds: error of law, lack of due process, or the improper exercise of discretionary power. This chapter discusses how (and to what extent) the three grounds of judicial review are supported by constitutional principle. Each ground must be controlled by the principle of comity. The principle of comity requires judges to defer to administrative authorities on some issues, to some extent; the chapter explains the limits of deference, and the difference—and the connections—between the rule of law and the rule of judges.

Access to the complete content on Law Trove requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access code, please see the information provided with the code or instructions printed within the title for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.