Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
'Jurisdictional' Facts and 'Hot' Facts: Legal Formalism, Legal Pluralism, and the Nature of Australian Administrative Law
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Fisher, Elizabeth |
| Copyright Year | 2015 |
| Abstract | This article is a study of the interrelationship between two intellectual impulses in Australian administrative law — legal formalism and legal pluralism. It concerns the operation of jurisdictional fact review in planning and environmental cases, focusing on the line of case law that led to the High Court decision in Corporation of the City of Enfield v Development Assessment Commission (2000). The analysis shows that these two intellectual impulses are closely entwined in doctrine, but each operates on a different basis of what a ‘fact’ is. Facts from a legal formalist perspective are understood as objective and hard-edged while from a legal pluralist perspective they are more likely to be conceptualised as contested and uncertain. |
| Starting Page | 968 |
| Ending Page | 968 |
| Page Count | 1 |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| Volume Number | 38 |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | http://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/1587013/383Fisher2.pdf |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |