This paper examines the status in Australian administrative law of the rule in Kruse v Johnson, which has long been used in England to determine whether delegated legislation is invalid on grounds of unreasonableness. The paper discusses the narrow approach adopted by Australian courts to challenges based on unreasonableness, most recently in the case of Attorney-General (SA) v Corporation of the City of Adelaide, and contrasts how the doctrine in Kruse v Johnson was used by courts in South Africa to overturn delegated legislation which unreasonably interfered with fundamental rights. The paper ends with a proposal that Australian courts adopt a broader approach to unreasonableness than they do at present.
|Number of pages||12|
|Journal||Journal of the Australasian Law Teachers Association|
|Publication status||Published - 2013|