File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
  • Find via Find It@HKUL
Supplementary

Article: Error of Law in Hong Kong Administrative Law: A Doctrinal Reappraisal

TitleError of Law in Hong Kong Administrative Law: A Doctrinal Reappraisal
Authors
Issue Date1-Sep-2024
PublisherHong Kong Law Journal Ltd.
Citation
Hong Kong Law Journal, 2024, v. 54, n. 2, p. 427-450 How to Cite?
Abstract

English administrative law has once distinguished between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional errors of law; establishing an error of law simpliciter was insufficient for an applicant. It is now trite that English administrative law has abandoned this historical distinction; an error of law simpliciter is reviewable. This investigation asks: has Hong Kong administrative law followed the modern English position, or has the historical distinction been retained? In an analysis that has been of influence in the academic literature, Thomson has concluded that the Hong Kong authorities are ambiguous on this point --- and that the doctrinal status quo is perforce problematic. This investigation reappraises Thomson’s conclusion, and contends that the doctrinal status quo is in fact clear: a clear line of authorities from the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal affirms that an error of law simpliciter is reviewable, and the historical distinction is no longer relevant for Hong Kong administrative law.


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/358745
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 0.3
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.112

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLui, Edward-
dc.date.accessioned2025-08-13T07:47:45Z-
dc.date.available2025-08-13T07:47:45Z-
dc.date.issued2024-09-01-
dc.identifier.citationHong Kong Law Journal, 2024, v. 54, n. 2, p. 427-450-
dc.identifier.issn0378-0600-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/358745-
dc.description.abstract<p>English administrative law has once distinguished between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional errors of law; establishing an error of law simpliciter was insufficient for an applicant. It is now trite that English administrative law has abandoned this historical distinction; an error of law simpliciter is reviewable. This investigation asks: has Hong Kong administrative law followed the modern English position, or has the historical distinction been retained? In an analysis that has been of influence in the academic literature, Thomson has concluded that the Hong Kong authorities are ambiguous on this point --- and that the doctrinal status quo is perforce problematic. This investigation reappraises Thomson’s conclusion, and contends that the doctrinal status quo is in fact clear: a clear line of authorities from the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal affirms that an error of law simpliciter is reviewable, and the historical distinction is no longer relevant for Hong Kong administrative law.<br></p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherHong Kong Law Journal Ltd.-
dc.relation.ispartofHong Kong Law Journal-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.titleError of Law in Hong Kong Administrative Law: A Doctrinal Reappraisal-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.volume54-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage427-
dc.identifier.epage450-
dc.identifier.issnl0378-0600-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats