70617 Final: Judicial Review - Error of law & Jurisdictional Error
Document Summary
Error of law: a ground of judicial review under adjr s5(1)(f, also a ground of review under common law, allows review of jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional error of law. Thus extended jurisdictional error has been accepted for the purposes of the adjr act: broad law so one of the easiest to argue under common law. There must be an error of law on the face of the record. Only questions of law will fall within the scope of judicial review. Through adjr: ss (cid:1009)(cid:894)1(cid:895)(cid:894)f(cid:895); (cid:1010)(cid:894)1(cid:895)(cid:894)f(cid:895): (cid:858)error of law(cid:859) ss (cid:1009)(cid:894)1(cid:895)(cid:894)j(cid:895); (cid:1010)(cid:894)1(cid:895)(cid:894)j(cid:895): (cid:858)otherwise (cid:272)o(cid:374)trary to law(cid:859) In general: whether facts fall within the provision of a statute is generally a question of law (hope v. Collector of customs v agfa gevaert ltd (1996) 186 clr 389: (cid:858)pozzolanic(cid:859) prin(cid:272)iples applied: The ordinary meaning of a word or its non-legal technical meaning is a question of fact. The meaning of a technical legal term is a question of law.
