Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The doctrine of exhaustion of remedies prevents a litigant from seeking a remedy in a new court or jurisdiction until all claims or remedies have been exhausted (pursued as fully as possible) in the original one. The doctrine was originally created by case law based on the principles of comity.
Darby v. Cisneros, 509 U.S. 137 (1993), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that federal courts cannot require that a plaintiff exhaust his administrative remedies before seeking judicial review when exhaustion of remedies is not required by either administrative rules or statute.
The Administrative Procedure Law (APL), also known as the Administrative Litigation Law (ALL), allows parties to bring suit when their lawful rights and interests are infringed by a specific administrative act of an administrative organ or its personnel. [4] It has provided an avenue for citizens challenging administrative actions since 1989.
Section 551 of the Administrative Procedure Act gives the following definitions: . Rulemaking is "an agency process for formulating, amending, or repealing a rule." A rule in turn is "the whole or a part of an agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy."
Administrative law is a division of law governing the activities of executive branch agencies of government. Administrative law includes executive branch rulemaking (executive branch rules are generally referred to as "regulations"), adjudication, and the enforcement of laws. Administrative law is considered a branch of public law.
The remedies available in Singapore administrative law are the prerogative orders – the mandatory order (formerly known as mandamus), prohibiting order (prohibition), quashing order (), and order for review of detention (habeas corpus) – and the declaration, a form of equitable remedy.
United Kingdom administrative law is part of UK constitutional law that is designed through judicial review to hold executive power and public bodies accountable under the law. A person can apply to the High Court to challenge a public body's decision if they have a "sufficient interest", [ 1 ] within three months of the grounds of the cause of ...
The Final Report made several recommendations about standardizing administrative procedures, but Congress delayed action as the US entered World War II. In 2005, the House Judiciary Committee undertook an Administrative Law, Process and Procedure Project to consider changes to the Administrative Procedure Act. [needs update]