CONSTI - LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS

SUBSTANTIVE LEGIT EXPECTATIONS KEY CASE

R v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food ex parte Hamble Fisheries

• Legitimate expectations are founded upon promises or established practices of public authorities.

  • Can be made by the Secretary of State, decision-makers, or local authorities.

  • Public bodies have a duty to act fairly, regardless of their specific label.

EXCEPTIONS TO LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS

1. Political manifesto promises, however, do not give rise to a legitimate expectation.

2. Those superseded by statutory duties.

3. National security

Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service 

1. The House of Lords recognized the legitimate expectation of consultation before changes to employment conditions, but held that national security concerns overrode this expectation.

DETRIMENTAL RELIANCE: KEY CASE

• R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Asif Mahmood Khan 

  • The Home Secretary's decision failed to consider Khan's legitimate expectations and the detrimental reliance he placed on his indefinite leave status.

  • The court recognized that public authorities must act fairly and consider the implications of their decisions on individuals who have relied upon their assurances.

NO DETRIMENTAL RELIANCE CASE DISMISSED

• Dismissed as There was no evidence of detrimental reliance; Mrs. Begbie had not demonstrated that she had taken any action based on the expectation created by those statements that resulted in harm or disadvantage.

SUBSTANTIVE LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS CASE APPLICATIONS

• R v North and East Devon Health Authority, ex parte Coughlan : 

  • A "home for life" promise made to patients at a new facility was deemed to create a substantive legitimate expectation. 

    • The court weighed the requirements of fairness against the asserted prohibitive cost of running the facility.

• R (on the application of RD (A Child)) v Worcestershire CC

  • Local authority's decision to withdraw educational support services without the promised transitional arrangements was found to unlawfully frustrate the families' legitimate expectation.

PROCEDURAL ILLEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS KEY CASE

• R v Secretary for the Home Department ex parte Behluli

  • The court ruled that statements regarding the handling of asylum applications did not meet the clarity and certainty requirements to establish a legitimate expectation that the Dublin Convention would be followed.

EVEN WHEN THERE IS NO GENERAL RIGHT TO HEARING MUST STILL FOLLOW PROCEDURES

 Attorney for Hong Kong v Ng Yuen Shiu

• Despite no general right to a hearing, the Director of Immigration's public undertaking that illegal immigrants would be interviewed before deportation created a legitimate expectation that was breached.

LACK OF CONSULTATION IN PROCEDURAL

• R. (on the application of Greenpeace Ltd) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry

  • Court found that the consultation process on nuclear power plants was procedurally unfair and breached the legitimate expectation of "fullest consultation." 

    • The lack of consultation on the substantive issue of nuclear new build rendered the process inadequate.

CREATING LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS THROUGH COURSE OF DEALING

• R (Patel) v General Medical Council 

  • Despite GMC's right to change its policy, the claimant's reliance on prior assurances regarding registration upon completing clinical requirements created a legitimate expectation that the GMC was obligated to honor.

STATUTORY DUTY AND LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS

R v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex parte Preston 

• HOL ruled that an organization or authority cannot make promises that go against its legal responsibilities.

  • However, exercising statutory power in a way that causes unfairness based on a prior assurance can be considered an abuse of power.

British Oxygen Co Ltd v Minister of Technology  (SUBSTANTIVE)

• Upheld the Board of Trade's right to have a general policy regarding grants, as long as it did not prevent the consideration of individual cases. 

CASE/TEST FOR LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS

R v North and East Devon Health Authority, Ex parte Coughlan

1. Clear and Unambiguous Representation

2. Inducement to Rely

3. Reasonableness of Expectation

4. Public Interest Considerations