Introduction

Administrative law is the branch of public law which is principally concerned with ensuring that
the government, government departments, tribunals and all authorities exercising public law
functions act within the perimeters of their power. Judicial review is the backbone of
administrative law and is the most potent judicial weapon available to an aggrieved individual
to challenge the validity of the decision-making process of public authorities.
A remedy can be described as an administrative remedy where it is provided for by statute and
does not involve resource to a court of law. Whatever the status of remedy be it administrative
or judicial the law provides a facility for the purposes of enabling an individual to challenge
administrative action. The nature and effect of such challenge allowed by remedy depend on a
wide range factors.
The administrative appeal is probably best known of the administrative remedies. There two
categories of appeal which are considerable practical significance, appeals from decisions and
other administrative action taken by local authorities and appeals from decisions of
government of ministers.

In Malaysia application of judicial review play a vital role for any disputes arise and settling
with remedies that concern. The purposes are to control the actions or decisions of the public
authorities in the administration of a state. In administrative law, there are two types of
common law remedies, namely private law remedies/non prerogative writ and public law
remedies/prerogative writ.
Among the private law remedies are damages, injunctions, and declarations. One can claim for
damages as compensation. Injunctions, on the other hand, are prohibitory in nature which case
the defendant will be compelled to perform. Thus, forbid the commission of some unlawful act.
Either be perpetual or interim injunction. In the light of case Sabil Mulia (M) Sdn Bhd v
Pengarah Hospital Tengku Ampuan Rahimah & Ors Court of Appeal had decided - section 29 of
the Government Proceedings does not prohibit the grant of an injunction against the Minister.
Declarations, in addition, aim to state or declare the legal position of the parties and to
challenge the action of the public authority. It is however noted that such remedy is not
enforceable per se, but it can be used with other remedies if successful.
Among the public law remedies or better known as prerogative writs are orders or process, the
issuance of which is discretionary with the court, as opposed to writs of right are habeas
corpus, certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.
In Malaysia, habeas corpus is a prerogative writ, order for the release of a person who has been
detained unlawfully, commonly used in connection with ISA detention to challenge the legality
of the decision. Such writ can be appealed by anyone or by someone acting on his or her behalf
regardless of nationality. In general, a writ of habeas corpus will be granted if the applicant is
able to prove that the detention is ultra vires and there is an excessive delay in bringing the
prisoner up for trial. It is noted that one must be brought before the Magistrate within 24 hours
of the detention.
Certiorari, Latin for quashing order, is a retrospective order that brings a decision made by the
authority before the court and prays that such decision to be quashed.
Prohibition, on the other hand, is a prospective order to quash a decision which is going to be
made. Its also to prevent those bodies from exercising acts which are in excess of their
jurisdiction. The application is under Order 53 of the Rules of Court 2012 and to be made within
90 days from the date when the grounds for the application arose or the decision is first
communicated to the applicant. One must bear in mind that failure to comply with such order
amounts to contempt of court, which is criminal in nature.
Mandamus well known as mandatory, meanwhile, is an order used to enforce public duties by
the decision-making body which it has failed to perform. It is enforced to ensure that the public
duties are performed by the public authorities. Source of application:
a- Chapter VIII of the Specific Relief Act 19503 - subjected to SRA
b- Order 53 of the Rules of Court 2012.
c- Paragraph 1 of the Courts of Judicature Act On the other hand, leave of court is needed for
order of mandamus under Order 53.
Both certiorari and mandamus can be claimed together.
In Malaysia, an application for judicial review is often denied due to ouster clauses. Ouster
clauses are finality clauses attempt to completely exclude judicial review. Words such as final
and/or shall not be questioned are often seen in Acts of Parliament to deem the decision made
by the Government be conclusive and does not subject to review.