The Procedural Contrast
The French investigative procedural tradition developed around Roman–Canonical procedure. This chapter describes its development and that of the Conseil d'Etat's expressly inquisitorial judicial procedures. It shows how the various developed procedures of the Conseil d'Etat enable it to address the complex repercussions of judicial intervention in polycentric administrative disputes. The chapter contrasts the English adversarial tradition, the origins and development of which it explains. With reference to the Factortame litigation and leading cases on liability, estoppel, and proportionality, it shows how adversarial procedures have handicapped English courts in administrative disputes. It describes the Order 53 procedural reforms to the peculiarly restrictive prerogative remedies, their culmination in the Application for Judicial Review, the attempt in O'Reilly v Mackman to prevent circumvention of its technical safeguards, the extent of the consequent criticism, and Lord Woolf's further proposal for a Director of Civil Proceedings. By not addressing the need for inquisitorial procedures, it argues, the reforms have failed to entrench an English distinction between public and private law, which is thus not in convergence with the French.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.