Here is the second part of my series on functus officio and reconsideration (see also here) Another layer of complexity is added by the fact that many statutes explicitly provide for reconsideration, often using different language, and sometimes giving the reconsideration authority to a member or panel that did not sit on the initial application. […] Read more

One of my favourite topics for dinner parties — which may be why I receive so few dinner party invitations — is the distinction between mandatory and directory considerations. Difficulties arise because while legislation often stipulates that certain formal and procedural requirements must be observed before an administrative decision is arrived at, it rarely states […] Read more

In my paper celebrating Vavilov’s fifth anniversary, I argued that the legal and factual constraints central to the application of the reasonableness standard of review have an objective character: it is up to reviewing courts to determine whether, in any given case, a particular legal or factual consideration constrains an administrative decision-maker. If the decision-maker has given […] Read more

This is going to be the first of three posts. I thought this would be a case note on a recent decision but it turns out there is quite a bit of throat clearing to do before I get there: Traditionally, the functus officio rule applies to administrative tribunals. Once a decision-maker has made a […] Read more