Skip to main content

Doctrine of legitimate expectation

 Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation


Firstly , lets understand about fair expectation and legal expectation

Fair expectation is an expectation that is natural expectation and directly comes to an human mind with the mindset backed with past .
For example – Parents expect their child to hold the 1st rank in among different schools during his/her exam but their child has only secured 3rd rank in his/her own school.
This is not a fair expectation as 1st rank among 500 schools students can’t be achieved if expected to be achieved during ongoing examination.
Legal expectation is a valid remedy provided by the court in case of breach of law .
A thief who stole Rs.10000 cannot be expected to get death sentence.

Just like the doctrine of proportionality the doctrine of legitimate expectation is also not part of any constitution or laws. It has developed over a period of time and was first developed in English law .
Legitimate expectation aims in
when a normal public is in a situation where it has to meet the public authority for the kind pursual of its problem or request and when they meet certain authorities they have certain legal expectation and a line of hope that whatever their problem or request is would be clarified under them.
These expectation is a natural pop in mind generated by the past experience or promises made on their for behalf towards the public.
The expectations of the public is generated public authority or government or somebody on behalf of the government if they state, promise , claim, work ,set an example ,represent , frame guidelines in favour of the public. It builds a virtual relationship between public and authority.
So, the public would expect a reasonable behaviour of being treated by the public authority .
Legitimate expectation is a reasonable expectation of public towards public authority.
If the public authority fails in meeting or fulfilling  the expectations of the public , public authority can be questioned or made accountable for the same
In this case public can approach the court , court would consider 3 keys in this case
- Whether a legitimate expectations has risen
- whether it would unlawful of the authority to neglect such expectation
- if the courts finds out the expectations were not fulfilled by the public authority , it would look into the remedies that are available to the aggrieved person.
When can doctrine of Legitimate expectations can be applied
- The representation must be clear
- The expectation must be related to the  behaviour of public authority
- The representation must be made by someone with authority and power
- The matter of representation must be relevant to the aggrieved party
Case law , In State of Kerela v. K . G . Madhavan pillai , 1988
Facts of the case
- Sanction was issued for the respondent to open a new aided school and to upgrade the existing schools
- However an order was issued after 15 days to keep the previous sanction in abeyance
- Order challenged considering violation of principle of natural justice

It was held by the SC that sanction has entitle the respondent with legitimate expectation 

the order however was violated the principle of national justice.



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more