To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Ridge v Baldwin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ridge v Baldwin
CourtHouse of Lords
Decided14 March 1963
Citation(s)[1964] AC 40, [1963] UKHL 2
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingLord Reid, Lord Evershed, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Hodson, and Lord Devlin

Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40 was a UK labour law case heard by the House of Lords.[1] The decision extended the doctrine of natural justice (procedural fairness in judicial hearings) into the realm of administrative decision making. As a result, the case has been described as "the landmark case" that opened up decisions taken by the UK executive to judicial review in English law.[2]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    11 738
    2 101
    2 225
  • Judicial review in English law
  • Baldwin High School Lip Dub 2015
  • New Homes in Minnesota by Pulte Homes 20201 Baldwin Floorplan

Transcription

Facts

The Brighton police authority dismissed its Chief Constable (Charles Ridge) without offering him an opportunity to defend his actions. The Chief Constable appealed, arguing that the Brighton Watch Committee (headed by George Baldwin) had acted unlawfully (ultra vires) in terminating his appointment in 1958 following criminal proceedings against him.[1]

Ridge also sought financial reparation from the police authority; having declined to seek reappointment, he sought a reinstatement of his pension, to which he would have been entitled with effect from 1960 had he not been dismissed, plus damages, or salary backdated to his dismissal.[3]

Judgment

The House of Lords held that Baldwin's committee had violated the doctrine of natural justice, overturning the principle outlined by the Donoughmore Committee thirty years before that the doctrine of natural justice could not be applied to administrative decisions.

Significance

"Natural justice" is a legal doctrine which requires an absence of bias (nemo iudex in causa sua) and the right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem). Ridge was the first time that the doctrine had been used to overturn a non-judicial (or quasi-judicial) decision.[2]

Notes

  1. ^ a b Slapper, Gary (24 June 2008). "The cases that changed Britain: 1955-1971". The Times. Retrieved 4 September 2011.
  2. ^ a b Gillian Peele (2004). Governing the UK: British politics in the 21st century (4th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. p. 475. ISBN 978-0-631-22681-9. Retrieved 28 August 2011.
  3. ^ "Mr Ridge's dismissal held in breach of natural justice". The Times. 15 March 1963. Retrieved 4 September 2011.


This page was last edited on 25 May 2022, at 19:48
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.