Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Natural justice
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Natural justice


Published on

disclaimer: …

this note is reference for student of Administrative Law (LAW506) in Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia. It's prepared by Puan Normawati Hashim

Published in: Education

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Natural JusticeMeaning:• Procedural safeguard against improper exercise of powers by a public authorit• Characterised as fair administrative procedure• Procedural fairness is an integral part of Administrative Law
  • 2. Natural Justice• Development and Application• Elements/Principles of Natural Justice• Effect of failure to observe natural justice
  • 3. Development and Application1. Look into the classification of powers - Applied if it involved quasi judicial power - Cooper v Wandsworth of Works (1863) 14 C.B.N.S. 1802. Strict approach - natural justice not applicable if it is pure administrative approach - Nakkuda Ali [1951 AC 66.3. Flexible approach -Ridge v Baldwin (1964) AC 40 -fairness -Re (H) K (an infant) [1967] 2 QB 617 -procedural fairness -Tan Teck Seng - Hong Leong
  • 4. Development and Application4. Principle of legitimate expectation• Legitimate expectation arises when there is a promise or representation or past practice followed by authority.• Legitimate Expectation includes expectation which goes beyond an enforceable legal right, provided it has reasonable basis.• Expectation may be based on some express statement of undertaking, or on behalf of, the public authority which has the duty of making the decision, or from the existence of a regular practice which the claimant can reasonably expect to continue.- Schmidt v Secreatary of State for Home Affairs [1969] 2 WLR 337.- -Re Liverpool Taxi Owners, Assoc. [1972]2 All ER 589- AG of Hong Kong v NG Yuen Shiu [1983] 2 AC 629.
  • 5. Legitimate Expectation• Application in Malaysia- J. P Belthelsen v Director General of Immigration [1987] 1 MLJ 134.- Dr. Benjamin George & Ors v Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya and others [1995] 3 MLJ 665.- Lee Freddie v Majlis Perbandaran Petaling Jaya [1994] 3 MLJ 640.
  • 6. Elements of Natural JusticeI. Right to be Heard (audi alteram partem)2. Rules against bias (nemo judex in causa sua)
  • 7. Right to be heard1. Notice a) Charges b) Time2. Hearing a) Written b) Oral c) Reasonable hearing
  • 8. Right to be heard1. Notice a) Content of charges should be informed - if charges on minor sentence but punish for severe punishment therefore notice must be given - grounds of charges must be clear -Maradana Mosque Trustee v Badi-ud-din- Mahmud [1967] 1 AC 13 - Mahadevan v Anandrajan [1974] 1 MLJ 2
  • 9. Right to be heard1. Notice b) Sufficient time must be given to make defence - Re Liverpool Taxi Owner’s Association [1972] 2 All ER 589 - Phang Moh Sin v Commissioner of Police [1967] 2 MLJ 186
  • 10. Right to be heard1. Hearing Introduction Hearing could be written or oral hearing because defending on the circumstances of an individual case - Ketua Pengarah Kastam v Ho Kwan Seng [1977] 2 MLJ 152a. Written If the case is simple and not complicated or technical written hearing is sufficient
  • 11. Right to be heardb. Oral - Oral hearing is needed if the case involved is complex or technical or serious charges had been made affecting reputation and livelihood of the alleged person - Travencore Rayons AIR 1971 SC 862 - Pett v Greyhound [1968] AII ER 545 - Phang Moh Sin - Pengarah Kastam
  • 12. Right to be heardc) Reasonable hearing To ensure that there is a fair hearing is given, the hearing must be reasonable. Reasonable hearing includes the following:i) Disclosure of evidence or informationii) Right to receive informationiii) Right to counseliv) Reasoned decisionv) Based on procedural fairness
  • 13. Right to be heardc) Reasonable hearing i) Disclosure of evidence or information - relevant material used in decision making must be brought to the notice of the alleged person - R v Secretary of state for the Home Department ex parte Hosenball [1977] 1 WLR 766 - R v Chief constable of North Wales Police v Evans [1982] - Fairmount Investments Ltd v Secretary of state for the Environment [1976] 1 WLR 1255 - Phang Moh Sin - Shamsiah Ahmad Sham (1990) 3 MLJ 364 - Abdul Rahman v Public Service Comm (1991) 2 MLJ 240 - Re Paragamon Press Ltd (1971) Ch 388
  • 14. Right to be heardc. Reasonable hearingii) Right to accept information- Decision maker must accept information or evidence given by the alleged person to support or rebut allegation against him/her- R v Board Visitors of Hull Prison ex parte St Germain (No. 2) 1 WLR 1401- Malayawata Steel Bhd v Union Malayawata Steel Workers [1978] 1 MLJ 87
  • 15. Right to be heardc. Reasonable hearingiii) Right to counsel - Generally not a right but if the case is complicated, serious, affecting reputation or livelihood the allege person should be allowed legal assistance- Pett v Greyhound Racing Association [1969] 1 QB 125- -Pett No 2 [1970] 1 QB 46- R Secretary v of State for the Home Department ex parte Tarrant [1985] QB 251- R v Board of Visitors of the Maze Prison ex parte Home and Mc Cartan [1988] AC 379
  • 16. Right to be heardc. Reasonable hearingiv) Reasoned decisions- It is not an obligation to give reasons but by giving reasoned decisions it amounts to good administration- Breen v AEU 2 QB 143- Travencore Rayons- Pemungut Hasil Tanah, Daerah Barat Daya, Pulau Pinang v Kam Gin Paik [1983] 2 MLJ 392- Rohana Ariffin v USM (1989) 1 MLJ 487
  • 17. Right to be heardC. Reasonable hearing iv. Reasoned decisions - Based on procedural fairness Giving of reasons extended to cases affecting fundamental liberties of a persons - Padfield v Minister of Agriculture , Fisheries and Food [[1968] AC 997 - Rohana Ariffin v USM - Hong Leong Equipment [1996] 1 MLJ 481 - based on Hong Leong
  • 18. Rules against biasElements of bias• Pecuniary bias• Personal bias• Policy bias
  • 19. Rules against biasElements1. Percuniary bias - percuniary interest disqualify a judge - Dimes v Grand Junction Canal (1852) 3 HLCas 759.
  • 20. Rules against biasElements2. Personal bias - adjudicator can’t have relationship, friendship, business with party in dispute - test- whether ther is likelihood of bias - Metropolitan Properties [1968] 3 All ER 304 - A. Kraipak AIR 1970 SC 150 - Govindaj v President MIC [1984] 1 MLJ 190
  • 21. Rules against biasElements3. Policy bias- Gullapalli N Rao v Andra Pradesh AIR 1959 SC 308- Franklin v Minister Town and Country Plainning (1948) AC 87- Alkaff & Co v The Governor-in-Council [1937] MLJ 202