Access to courts by public interest groups seeking to challenge government decisions: A comparative analysis of Canada and Australia

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

In a era marked by increasing government regulation, one method of challenging government decisions is for citizens and public interest groups within society to seek access to the courts. Although there are other avenues, such as through the political process or media pressure, the legal process is attractive because courts can grant effective remedies and their decisions carry weight due to the authority and independence of the judiciary. Judaical review by the courts provides an effective mechanism for review of government decisions. However, the first step - gaining access to the courts - can be a barrier. Citizens have increasingly sought access to the courts to redress broad social and political issues. Courts have responded by gradually granting access to some public interest groups, carefully ensuring a credible predictable basis for this access. This chapter will map how the courts have widened access to public interest groups. It will adopt a comparativist approach by considering cases in a variety of different interest areas in Canada and Australia. The chapter argues that meaningful redress of wrongs through public interest litigation in domestic courts can - and should - remain a useful strategy for securing global justice.
LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationGlobal governance and regulation
Subtitle of host publicationOrder and disorder in the 21st century
EditorsD Ireland-Piper, L Wolff
Place of PublicationOxon
Chapter15
Pages245-260
Number of pages16
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

public interest
interest group
Canada
citizen
legal process
judiciary
remedies
justice
regulation

Cite this

Bedford, N., & Bonin, L. (2018). Access to courts by public interest groups seeking to challenge government decisions: A comparative analysis of Canada and Australia. In D. Ireland-Piper, & L. Wolff (Eds.), Global governance and regulation: Order and disorder in the 21st century (pp. 245-260). Oxon.
Bedford, Narelle ; Bonin, Lisa. / Access to courts by public interest groups seeking to challenge government decisions : A comparative analysis of Canada and Australia. Global governance and regulation: Order and disorder in the 21st century. editor / D Ireland-Piper ; L Wolff. Oxon, 2018. pp. 245-260
@inbook{7a7941d4a0f2482bbdc88b68f550bb51,
title = "Access to courts by public interest groups seeking to challenge government decisions: A comparative analysis of Canada and Australia",
abstract = "In a era marked by increasing government regulation, one method of challenging government decisions is for citizens and public interest groups within society to seek access to the courts. Although there are other avenues, such as through the political process or media pressure, the legal process is attractive because courts can grant effective remedies and their decisions carry weight due to the authority and independence of the judiciary. Judaical review by the courts provides an effective mechanism for review of government decisions. However, the first step - gaining access to the courts - can be a barrier. Citizens have increasingly sought access to the courts to redress broad social and political issues. Courts have responded by gradually granting access to some public interest groups, carefully ensuring a credible predictable basis for this access. This chapter will map how the courts have widened access to public interest groups. It will adopt a comparativist approach by considering cases in a variety of different interest areas in Canada and Australia. The chapter argues that meaningful redress of wrongs through public interest litigation in domestic courts can - and should - remain a useful strategy for securing global justice.",
author = "Narelle Bedford and Lisa Bonin",
year = "2018",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781472489012",
pages = "245--260",
editor = "D Ireland-Piper and L Wolff",
booktitle = "Global governance and regulation",

}

Bedford, N & Bonin, L 2018, Access to courts by public interest groups seeking to challenge government decisions: A comparative analysis of Canada and Australia. in D Ireland-Piper & L Wolff (eds), Global governance and regulation: Order and disorder in the 21st century. Oxon, pp. 245-260.

Access to courts by public interest groups seeking to challenge government decisions : A comparative analysis of Canada and Australia. / Bedford, Narelle; Bonin, Lisa.

Global governance and regulation: Order and disorder in the 21st century. ed. / D Ireland-Piper; L Wolff. Oxon, 2018. p. 245-260.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Access to courts by public interest groups seeking to challenge government decisions

T2 - A comparative analysis of Canada and Australia

AU - Bedford, Narelle

AU - Bonin, Lisa

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - In a era marked by increasing government regulation, one method of challenging government decisions is for citizens and public interest groups within society to seek access to the courts. Although there are other avenues, such as through the political process or media pressure, the legal process is attractive because courts can grant effective remedies and their decisions carry weight due to the authority and independence of the judiciary. Judaical review by the courts provides an effective mechanism for review of government decisions. However, the first step - gaining access to the courts - can be a barrier. Citizens have increasingly sought access to the courts to redress broad social and political issues. Courts have responded by gradually granting access to some public interest groups, carefully ensuring a credible predictable basis for this access. This chapter will map how the courts have widened access to public interest groups. It will adopt a comparativist approach by considering cases in a variety of different interest areas in Canada and Australia. The chapter argues that meaningful redress of wrongs through public interest litigation in domestic courts can - and should - remain a useful strategy for securing global justice.

AB - In a era marked by increasing government regulation, one method of challenging government decisions is for citizens and public interest groups within society to seek access to the courts. Although there are other avenues, such as through the political process or media pressure, the legal process is attractive because courts can grant effective remedies and their decisions carry weight due to the authority and independence of the judiciary. Judaical review by the courts provides an effective mechanism for review of government decisions. However, the first step - gaining access to the courts - can be a barrier. Citizens have increasingly sought access to the courts to redress broad social and political issues. Courts have responded by gradually granting access to some public interest groups, carefully ensuring a credible predictable basis for this access. This chapter will map how the courts have widened access to public interest groups. It will adopt a comparativist approach by considering cases in a variety of different interest areas in Canada and Australia. The chapter argues that meaningful redress of wrongs through public interest litigation in domestic courts can - and should - remain a useful strategy for securing global justice.

UR - https://www.routledge.com/Global-Governance-and-Regulation-Order-and-Disorder-in-the-21st-Century/Ireland-Piper-Wolff/p/book/9781472489012

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781472489012

SP - 245

EP - 260

BT - Global governance and regulation

A2 - Ireland-Piper, D

A2 - Wolff, L

CY - Oxon

ER -

Bedford N, Bonin L. Access to courts by public interest groups seeking to challenge government decisions: A comparative analysis of Canada and Australia. In Ireland-Piper D, Wolff L, editors, Global governance and regulation: Order and disorder in the 21st century. Oxon. 2018. p. 245-260