Admin Law Question 1 + 2 (750-750 words) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Admin Law Question 1 + 2 (750-750 words) - Essay Example By s1 of the 1967 Act he is appointed by the Queen on the advice of the PM and holds office until the age of 65. Especially in relation to JR, the procedural requirements of public law element, leave, locus standi, time limits and grounds often deny speedy redress to the applicant. Matters such as delay, incompetence, stupidity, loss of documents, rudeness etc cannot be the subject to the JR. But, these fall within PCA’s jurisdiction. Disadvantage: the MPs check the legitimacy of complaints and it is called MP Filter. If a MP is the main culprit, claimants never get redress. In this sense MP enjoy more power. At the same time each year lots of letter of complain arises which not possible to review for an ombudsman. The most important factor to mention is the ombudsman will not investigate complaints where an alternate remedy exists. Ombudsmans powers of investigation are limited, for example-maladministration. 3) The PCA has had an impact on certain more High profile cases such as ‘Sachsendhausen’ case where the PCA found maladministration in distributing compensation. A recent example is the ‘Barlow Clowes Affair’. Jurisdiction: The 1967 Act should be amended to provide that the PCA could investigate all complaints other than those relating to matters specifically excluded. However, the govt. rejected this proposal. However MPs have some great advantages as redressers of grievances. Their services are free and easily accessible; many MPs take great pains to advertise their surgery times and other means of contract in the local media. Most are assiduous in taking up grievances, and often the mere fact of receiving a letter from an MP, rather than from an ordinary citizen, will induce the authority to give a favorable response. Further, the Mp’s services are equally useful whether the constituent is asking for the correction of an error or the more favorable exercise of discretion, where no legal