A D M I N L A W

WS Remedies

Public Law Remedies

a. Introduction:

Applicants seeks remedy, JR determies the course

All discretionary remedy

Applicants must have

Locus standi

Decision that is subject to JR

Entitled to one/more remedy

Remedies available:

Certiorari

Mandamus

Prohibition

b. Certiorari

Looks to the pass and quash decisions which is unlawful

Effect: as if decision was never made

Result: remitted to the PA

EX Shapher: revocation of permit –certiorari used to quash unlawful decisions in breach of NJ but not legislative decisions

Public Law Remedies

Used to control judicial actions

C. Mandamus: (AJA 5(1)(c); JRA 5(8)(a)

Used to compel performance of a public duty (wade & Forsyth: commonest weapon in the hands of an ordinary citizen when PA has not done its duty; Re BTL: order granted for the director of telecommunication to keep a register, was a statutory duty)

d. Prohibition:

Prevents PA from continuing a public duty

Prevents a future unlawful action (Linton v Hyman: sought order to prevent magistrate from hearing a matter, no prohibition because magistrate did not act unlawful)

2) Private Law Remedy

Used where public law remedies are insufficient

Remedies are:

Damages

Injunction

Declaration

Restitution

Private Law remedy

Return of money

b. Damages:

1. Judicial Review Act of Barbados (AJA: s5)

Court may grant damage/restitution (Pilgrim v Nurse: applicant not always entitled to damages except where there has been deliberate, malicious abuse of power, AJA provides for the improvement of administrative justice in Barbados)

2. Judicial Review Act of Trinidad (JRA s 8)\

May award if applicant applies for it

Gooding v PSC: court may grant damages if

Applicant includes it in his claim

Action was begun by the applicant

Criteria was fulfilled

c. Injunction: (AJA 5(2)(e); JRA 8(1)(b) (2)(3)

Private law remedies

Operates to stop an activity immediately pending the final determination (Blake Estate v AG Montserrat: constructing of cemetery on private land -Injunction granted within the American Cyanamid rules, damage would have been inadequate; Damage adequate no injunction granted within the American Cyanamid test- Mason v UWI)

d. Restitution (AJA 5(2)(f), JRA 8(5)

Disgorging of profits made from wrongdoing

Prevention of unjust enrichment (travellers Rest Lodge v Haylock: no restitution on the reimbursement of fees charged at a cave entrance, on the facts the amount not quantified and money was paid by the tourist so there was no loss

e. Declaration: (AJA 5(2)(d); JRA8(1)(b); (2)(3)

Pronouncement on a legal matter

Outlines what the legal rights are (Francois v AG: whether applicant had locus standi which shows that he was personally affected)