Sherlock v Lloyd & Ors

(2010) 27 VR 434; [2010] VSCA 122

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Reasons for decision
4. › Statutory obligation to give reasons on request
5. › Whether inadequacy of reasons constitutes error of law
6. › Whether sole remedy is order for further reasons
7. › Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic), ss 3, 7, 8, 10
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Medical panel
4. › Nature of function performed
5. › Whether judicial or administrative function
6. › Whether common law obligation to give reasons
7. › Accident Compensation Act 1985 (Vic), Part III, Division 3
1. Administrative Law
2. › Natural justice
3. › Reasons for decision
4. › Whether statutory obligation to give reasons on request enlarges rules of natural justice
5. › Public Service Board of NSW v Osmond
6. › Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic), s 8(1)
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Scope of Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic)
4. › Whether Act created new grounds of review or altered substantive law
5. › Machinery legislation facilitating conventional judicial review

Quick Take

The inadequacy of reasons provided by a medical panel (or other tribunal) in response to a request under s 8(1) of the Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic) is not, of itself, an error of law amenable to prerogative relief. The sole statutory remedy is to seek an order under s 8(4) for a further statement of reasons. However, from the absence or inadequacy of reasons, a court may draw an inference that the tribunal failed to exercise its powers according to law, and may act on that inference to set the decision aside. The numerous first instance decisions to the contrary are overruled.