Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
This thesis presents an analysis of three recent judgments of our apex courts which collectively illustrate a maximising of the 'minimum threshold requirement' of rationality through the seemingly inexhaustible constitutional principle of legality. The question sought to be addressed is whether, in...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Department of Public Law
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | This thesis presents an analysis of three recent judgments of our apex courts which collectively illustrate a maximising of the 'minimum threshold requirement' of rationality through the seemingly inexhaustible constitutional principle of legality. The question sought to be addressed is whether, in extending this baseline requirement to cover procedural fairness, reason-giving and something akin to proportionality, in the context of non-administrative action and in the absence of any meaningful engagement with the doctrine of separation of powers, the courts are going too far. |
|---|