“The administrative law denotes that portion of nation’s legal system which determines the

legal statutes and liabilities of all state offences, which defines the legal statutes and liabilities
of all state offences, which defines the rights and liabilities of private individuals in their
dealing their public officials and which specifies the procedure by which these rights and
liabilities are enforced”
-Dicey-
According to this definition, administrative law determines legal status and responsibilities of
all government authorities. Through this report, I provide a discussion about the manner in
which the principles of rule of law, separation of powers and parliamentary sovereignty have
formed the basis for administrative law and the manner in how judicial review has provided
protection and security limits for power.
The structure and functioning of the United Kingdom’s administrative bodies are underpinned
by the theoretical principles of the rule of law, separation of powers and parliamentary
sovereignty to ensure accountability and representation of their powers. In exercising this
administrative power, no authority can exercise its power arbitrarily and it has been confirmed
by the power of judicial review.
Parliamentary Sovereignty can be described as a deeply rooted principle in the Westminster
system. Parliament has supreme power to enact and amend laws. Administrative bodies derive
their authority through laws enacted by parliament. It is an essential function of administrative
bodies to give individuals an opportunity to be heard and present before decisions affecting
their rights or interests are taken. This principle prevents the ability of administrative bodies to
take arbitrary and biased decisions and paves the way for a fair process.
In R (Miller) vs Secretary of state for exiting the European Union1 case stated that, UK supreme
court affirmed that only parliament had the authority to trigger Brexit. But in case of Anisminic
Ltd vs Foreign Compensation Commission2, it was stated in this case that the court can
judicially review decisions taken by the administrative bodies outside of their scope even in
the cases where parliament has delegated authority and that the administrative bodies are
subject to the intention of the parliament. Thus, it clear that through the parliamentary
sovereignty, the necessary laws are made by the administrative institutions and they cannot act
arbitrarily due to judicial review.
The Rule of Law is a very important principle in democratic society. Government institutions
and administrative bodies must operate under the law and no agency can exceed the authority
of the state. It is confirmed by the rule of law. In Council of Civil Service Unions vs Minister
for civil Service3 case confirmed that public authorities must act only within their legal powers.
No institution can act violates the rule of law and administrative authorities should always
promote transparency, accountability and fairness.
But the effectiveness of judicial review in upholding the rule of law is complex. According to
the case of O’Reilly vs Mackman4, the no-go area principle seems to limit the power of the

1
R (Miller) vs Secretary of state for exiting the European Union (Rev 3) (2017) UKSC 5
2
Anisminic Ltd vs Foreign Compensation Commission (1969) 2 AC 147
3
Council of Civil Service Unions vs Minister for the Civil Service (1984) 3 AII ER 935; (1985) AC 374.
4
O’Reilly vs Mackman (1983) 2 AC 237
courts to review certain administrative decisions by limiting the application of the rule of law.
The case of R (Daly) vs Secretary of the State for the Home Department5, questioned whether
the rule of law can be fully achieved in this work.
The principle of Separation of Powers prevents the concentration of power in one institution.
There should be clear division of powers between the legislature, the executive and the
judiciary. Otherwise, there is a possibility of building a dictatorial power. Administrative
authorities’ function through the executive. Their functions and powers are clearly defined by
the principle of separation of powers.
It can be seen that the principle of separation of powers is strengthened because the power of
judicial review can be exercised by checking the legality and fairness of administrative actions.
The case R (Evans) vs Attorney General6, highlighted complexities of maintaining a clear
separation of powers while protecting national security information through judicial review.
Although the principles mentioned above provide the basis for administrative law, access to
justice is essential to challenge laws that adversely affect individuals. It is clear through the
power of judicial review that administrative proceedings should be carried out legally and
fairly. Individuals are given opportunity to seek judicial intervention if an administrative
agency arbitrarily uses its power to exercise an individual right. This makes it clear that
administrative law is subject to external supervision. And administrative bodies are accountable
for their actions and decisions. They should act under the principle of accountability. It is also
explained in the case of Associated Provincial Picture Ltd vs Wednesbury Corporation7.
British House of Lords has stated that in the case, R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) vs Secretary
of the state for the Environment, Transport and the Regions8, importance of fair decision -
making procedures and also stated that judicial review in line with the rule of law, separation
of powers and a need to make administrative procedures transparent and accountable. However,
it is important take into account the limits of the judicial review. Courts often respect
administrative expertise because failure to rigorously assess administrative decisions may
impede full compliance with the rule of law. That has been clearly stated in R (Bancoult) vs
Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs9 case.
In conclusion, from all the principle mentioned above, it is clear that in the United Kingdom,
the theoretical principles of rule of law, separation of powers and parliamentary sovereignty
provide the foundation for its administrative law. The judicial review process acts as
mechanism to develop a fair and accountable administrative system while protecting each of
these principles. This process has to be done very meticulously in practice and it can be seen
that there are times when various challenges are faced. In the case, R (Privacy international)
vs investigatory powers tribunal10, problem arose that the judicial review power may face a
problematic situation when dealing with complex issues such as national security. Interplay of
these principles and judicial review operate within practical limits in the administrative system.

5
R (Daly) vs Secretary of State for the Home Department (2001) UKHL 26
6
R (Evans) vs Attorney General (2015) UKSC 21, (2015) 1 AC 1787
7
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd vs Wednesbury Corporation (1948) 1 KB 223
8
R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) vs Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and Regions (2001)
UKHL 23
9
R (Bancoult) vs Secretary of state for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, (No 2) (2008) UKHL 61
10
R (Privacy International) vs Investigatory Powers Tribunal (2019) UKSC 22
However, all these principles provide the basis that administrative authorities should act fairly
and accountably.

Bibliography
(1) Primary Sources

Case laws
• R (Miller) vs Secretary of state for exiting the European Union (Rev 3) (2017) UKSC 5
• Anisminic Ltd vs Foreign Compensation Commission (1969) 2 AC 147
• Council of Civil Service Unions vs Minister for the Civil Service (1984) 3 AII ER 935; (1985)
AC 374.
• O’Reilly vs Mackman (1983) 2 AC 237
• R (Daly) vs Secretary of State for the Home Department (2001) UKHL 26
• R (Evans) vs Attorney General (2015) UKSC 21, (2015) 1 AC 1787
• Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd vs Wednesbury Corporation (1948) 1 KB 223
• R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) vs Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and
Regions (2001) UKHL 23
• R (Bancoult) vs Secretary of state for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, (No 2) (2008) UKHL
61
• R (Privy International) vs Investigatory Powers Tribunal (2019) UKSC 22

(2) Secondary Sources

Journal Article

• Dicey on Administrative Law < https://unacademy.com/content/upsc/study-

material/public-administration/dicey-on-administrative-
law/#:~:text=Dicey%20defined%20administrative%20law%20as,judicial%20review
%20of%20administrative%20actions.> last accessed on 1st of September 2023