Mrs Agbator Summary Note

NAME: ANDREW JONES EMANKHU
MATT NO: FLW/LAW/19/53444
FACULTY: LAW
COURSE: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
DATE: 31/10/2024
SUMMARY NOTE
1. Administrative and Adjudication Powers
Administrative and adjudication powers are essential functions of government agencies that allow
them to make decisions and enforce laws. These powers enable agencies to regulate various aspects
of society, from environmental protection to public health. However, there are times when these
agencies may overreach their authority, leading to potential violations of individuals' legal rights.
For instance, if an agency imposes a fine without proper justification or fails to follow due process,
it can create disputes. These disputes often require resolution through specialized courts known as
tribunals or inquiries, which are designed to handle such matters. The goal of these tribunals is to
ensure fairness and justice, providing a platform for individuals to challenge administrative
decisions that they believe are unjust or unlawful. This system helps maintain a balance between
the powers of administrative bodies and the rights of citizens, ensuring that everyone is treated
fairly under the law.
Cases:
1. Adebayo v. Attorney-General of Ogun State(2001) 15 NWLR (Pt. 736) 391: The court held
that administrative bodies must act within their statutory powers and follow due process.
2. Ojukwu v. Military Governor of Lagos State (2001) 14 NWLR (Pt. 733) 531: The court
established that administrative decisions can be challenged on grounds of ultra-vires or
breach of natural justice.
3. Nigeria Bar Association v. Attorney-General of the Federation (2001) 16 NWLR (Pt.
740) 731: The court emphasized the importance of judicial review in ensuring
accountability of administrative bodies.
Statutes:
1. Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria: Guarantees fair
hearing and provides for judicial review of administrative decisions.
2. Administrative Procedures Act, Cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004:
Regulates administrative procedures and provides for review of administrative decisions.
3. Tribunals of Inquiry Act, Cap T21, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004: Establishes
tribunals to investigate and adjudicate on administrative disputes.
4. Federal High Court Act, Cap F12, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004: Grants
jurisdiction to the Federal High Court to review administrative decisions.
Specific Provisions:
1. Section 6(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution: Empowers courts to review administrative

decisions that violate fundamental rights.
2. Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution: Guarantees fair hearing in administrative proceedings.
3. Section 12 of the Administrative Procedures Act: Requires administrative bodies to
provide reasons for their decisions
Exceptions to Administrative and Adjudication Powers
1. National Security: Administrative decisions related to national security may be exempt

from judicial review (Section 45 of the 1999 Constitution).
2. Diplomatic Immunity: Foreign diplomats and officials may be immune from
administrative proceedings (Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act, Cap D5, Laws
of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004).
3. Statutory Immunity: Certain statutes grant immunity to administrative bodies or officials
from liability or prosecution (e.g., Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution).
2. Judicial Control of Administrative Power

Judicial control of administrative power is a crucial mechanism that allows courts to
oversee and review the actions of administrative bodies. This oversight ensures that these
agencies operate within the legal framework and do not abuse their powers. Courts can
intervene when there are grounds for judicial review, which include several key reasons.
One of the primary grounds is "ultra-vires," meaning that an agency has acted beyond its
legal authority. Another important ground is a "breach of natural justice," which occurs
when an individual is not given a fair opportunity to present their case or is treated unfairly
during the decision-making process. Additionally, if an administrative body makes an
"error of law," such as misinterpreting legal statutes, the courts can step in to correct these
mistakes. This judicial oversight is vital for upholding the rule of law and protecting
individual rights against potential administrative overreach.
a. Grounds for Judicial Review

The grounds for judicial review are specific reasons that allow courts to evaluate the decisions
made by administrative bodies. The concept of "ultra-vires" is significant here; it refers to
actions taken by an agency that exceed the powers granted to it by law. When an agency makes
a decision that it is not legally authorized to make, affected individuals can seek judicial review.
Another critical ground is the "breach of natural justice," which emphasizes the importance of
fair procedures. If a person feels they were not given a fair chance to present their case or were
treated unjustly, they can challenge the decision in court. Lastly, an "error of law" occurs when
an administrative body misapplies or misunderstands the law, leading to incorrect decisions.
Courts can review these decisions to ensure that the law is correctly interpreted and applied, thus
safeguarding the rights of individuals.
b. Remedies
When a court finds that an administrative decision is flawed, it can provide various remedies to
address the situation. One common remedy is "certiorari," which allows a higher court to
review and potentially overturn a lower court's decision. Another remedy is "prohibition,"
which prevents an administrative body from acting beyond its legal powers. "Mandamus" is
an order that compels an agency to fulfill a duty it is legally required to perform.
Additionally, a court may issue a "declaration," which clarifies the rights of the parties
involved in a dispute. An "injunction" is another remedy that can stop someone from taking
certain actions, while "habeas corpus" protects individuals from unlawful detention. Courts
may also award "damages" as compensation for harm caused by an administrative decision.
Lastly, individuals have the right to appeal to a higher court if they believe a decision was
made in error, ensuring that there are multiple avenues for seeking justice.
c. Action by and Against Statutory Corporations

Statutory corporations, such as local government councils, play a significant role in the legal
landscape. These entities can engage in legal actions, either by taking action against others or
by being sued themselves. For example, a statutory corporation may initiate legal proceedings
to enforce regulations or recover debts owed to it. Conversely, individuals or organizations
may bring lawsuits against statutory corporations if they believe their rights have been
violated or if the corporation has acted unlawfully. The ability of statutory corporations to
participate in legal actions ensures accountability and transparency in their operations. It also
provides a mechanism for individuals to seek redress when they feel wronged by these
entities. This dual capacity to act and be acted against is essential for maintaining the rule of
law and ensuring that statutory corporations operate within their legal frameworks.
d. Enforcement of Fundamental Human Rights

The enforcement of fundamental human rights is a critical aspect of any legal system, ensuring that
individuals' basic rights are protected and upheld. This enforcement often involves legal action when
rights are violated, allowing individuals to seek justice and remedy for grievances. Fundamental
human rights encompass a wide range of protections, including the right to free speech, the right to a
fair trial, and the right to privacy, among others. When these rights are infringed upon, individuals can
turn to the courts to assert their rights and seek appropriate remedies. Legal frameworks often provide
specific mechanisms for addressing human rights violations, ensuring that individuals have access to
justice. This enforcement is vital for promoting social justice and equality, as it holds both
governmental and private entities accountable for their actions. By safeguarding fundamental human
rights, the legal system plays a crucial role in fostering a fair and just society where everyone can
enjoy their rights without fear of infringement.
Here are some Nigeria cases and statutes that illustrate judicial control of administrative power:
*Cases:*
1. _Adebayo v. Attorney-General of Ogun State_ (2001) 15 NWLR (Pt. 736) 391:
Established that administrative bodies must act within their statutory powers.
2. _Ojukwu v. Military Governor of Lagos State_ (2001) 14 NWLR (Pt. 733) 531: Held that
administrative decisions can be challenged on grounds of ultra-vires or breach of natural justice.
3. _Nigeria Bar Association v. Attorney-General of the Federation_ (2001) 16 NWLR (Pt. 740) 731:
Emphasized the importance of judicial review in ensuring accountability of administrative bodies.
*Statutes:*
1. _Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria_: Guarantees fair
hearing and provides for judicial review of administrative decisions.
2. _Administrative Procedures Act, Cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004_:
Regulates administrative procedures and provides for review of administrative decisions.
3. _Judicial Review Act, Cap J13, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004_: Establishes
procedures for judicial review of administrative decisions.
4. _Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009_: Provides procedures for
enforcing fundamental human rights.
*Specific Provisions:*
1. _Section 6(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution_: Empowers courts to review administrative
decisions that violate fundamental rights.
2. _Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution_: Guarantees fair hearing in administrative proceedings.
3. _Section 12 of the Administrative Procedures Act_: Requires administrative bodies to
provide reasons for their decisions.
*Grounds for Judicial Review:*

1. _Ultra-vires_: Acting beyond statutory powers (Adebayo v. Attorney-General of Ogun
State, 2001).
2. _Breach of natural justice_: Failure to provide fair hearing (Ojukwu v. Military
Governor of Lagos State, 2001).
3. _Error of law_: Misinterpreting or misapplying the law (Nigeria Bar
Association v. Attorney-General of the Federation, 2001).
*Remedies:*
1. _Certiorari_: Reviewing lower court decisions (Section 234 of the 1999 Constitution).
2. _Prohibition_: Preventing administrative bodies from acting beyond their powers (Section
236 of the 1999 Constitution).
3. _Mandamus_: Compelling administrative bodies to perform duties (Section 237 of the
1999 Constitution).
4. _Declaration_: Clarifying rights and obligations (Section 238 of the 1999 Constitution).
5. _Injunction_: Restraining administrative bodies from taking certain actions (Section 239
of the 1999 Constitution).
*Action by and Against Statutory Corporations:*

1. _Local Government Councils_: Can initiate or defend legal actions (Local Government
Councils Act, Cap L20, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004).
2. _Statutory Corporations_: Can engage in legal actions (Statutory Corporations Act,
Cap S27, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004).
*Enforcement of Fundamental Human Rights:*

1. _Right to fair hearing_: Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.
2. _Right to life_: Section 33 of the 1999 Constitution.
3. _Right to privacy_: Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution.
4. _Right to freedom of expression_: Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution.
*Exceptions to Judicial Review*
1. *Matters of Discretion*: Administrative decisions involving discretion may not be

reviewable by courts (Adebayo v. Attorney-General of Ogun State, 2001).
2. *Policy Decisions*: Policy decisions made by administrative bodies may not be
subject to judicial review (Ojukwu v. Military Governor of Lagos State, 2001).
3. *Emergency Situations*: Administrative decisions made during emergency situations
may be exempt from judicial review (Section 45 of the 1999 Constitution).
*Exceptions to Fair Hearing*
1. *National Interest*: Fair hearing may be limited in cases involving national interest or
security (Section 45 of the 1999 Constitution).
2. *Urgent Situations*: Fair hearing may be dispensed with in urgent situations where delay
would prejudice the public interest (Section 36(3) of the 1999 Constitution).
3. *Specialized Tribunals*: Certain specialized tribunals may have limited fair
hearing requirements (e.g., Tribunals of Inquiry Act).
*Exceptions to Administrative Procedures Act*
1. *Emergency Procedures*: Administrative bodies may bypass procedures in emergency

situations (Section 13 of the Administrative Procedures Act).
2. *National Security*: Administrative procedures may be modified or waived for national
security reasons (Section 45 of the 1999 Constitution).
3. *Specialized Agencies*: Certain specialized agencies may be exempt from the
Administrative Procedures Act (e.g., Central Bank of Nigeria Act).
Case Law Exceptions

1. _Attorney-General of the Federation v. ANPP_ (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt. 843) 113: Held that
judicial review is not available for policy decisions.
2. _Governor of Lagos State v. Ojukwu_ (2001) 14 NWLR (Pt. 733) 531: Established
that fair hearing is not required in emergency situations.
3. _Nigeria Bar Association v. Attorney-General of the Federation_ (2001) 16 NWLR (Pt.
740) 731: Held that judicial review is limited in matters of discretion.

Mrs Agbator Summary Note

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mrs Agbator Summary Note

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mrs Agbator Summary Note

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NAME: ANDREW JONES EMANKHU

MATT NO: FLW/LAW/19/53444

COURSE: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

1. Section 6(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution: Empowers courts to review administrative

1. National Security: Administrative decisions related to national security may be exempt

2. Judicial Control of Administrative Power

a. Grounds for Judicial Review

c. Action by and Against Statutory Corporations

d. Enforcement of Fundamental Human Rights

Grounds for Judicial Review:

Action by and Against Statutory Corporations:

Enforcement of Fundamental Human Rights:

Exceptions to Judicial Review

1. Matters of Discretion: Administrative decisions involving discretion may not be

Exceptions to Fair Hearing

Exceptions to Administrative Procedures Act

1. Emergency Procedures: Administrative bodies may bypass procedures in emergency

Case Law Exceptions

You might also like