powers to make statutory rules conferred before the Statutory Instruments
came into force (pp.
the discussion of sub-delegated legis-
and the critical summary of the various types
administrative tribunals (pp.
courageous attempt to give a
general description of their composition and powers (pp.
point is well made that the cases of
Errington, Robinson, Johnson
were decided on the interpretation of the statutes concerned (p.
authors are probably right in thinking that the
does not overrule
is true that the House of Lords affirmed the
Court of Appeal in
but they did
ground. The principle relating to prerogative legislation for Colonies
once correctly stated
though the authority for it in its modern form
The Lands Tribunal
thought to be admirably devised (p.
but the Rent Tribunals are not
regarded as satisfactory (p.
The decision in
which caused some excitement,
put into proper perspective by the reminder that few tribunals are compelled
full record (p.
Whether public corporations are Crown
servants for purposes of civil liability and proceedings the authors think
depends on the degree of control exercised by the Government, and this view
leads to the suggestion that the Central Land Board and the Agricultural
Land Commission are Crown servants, that Regional Hospital Boards are
probably Crown servants, and that the position of the New Town Develop-
ment Corporations is uncertain (pp.
may be that
contractual relationship exists between statutory undertaker and consumer
but we are not convinced that Departments which were incorporated
before the Crown Proceedings Act,
without being expressly made suable,
can still be sued otherwise than under the provisions of this Act (p.
One of the less satisfactory passages is that on statutory interpretation,
the principles of which it is not possible to discuss in the limited space
Denning L.J.’s dictum in
set out here at some length, was not approved in the House
footnote indicates; and we derive confusion rather than help
the statement quoted from Professor Willis’s article in
is no longer correct to say that penal statutes are strictly con-
strued, apart from the fact that “strictly” is ambiguous. The arrangement
due to division of labour separates the discussion of the exclusion of judicial
control over delegated legislation (pp.
from the similar problem
relating to the judicial powers of administrative bodies (pp.
exposition of the conceptual and functional distinctions between administrative
and judicial powers at the beginning of chapter
will not be easy reading for
the student (pp.
but this was probably the most difficult part of
write, and the authors must not be blamed in
difficulty is inherent in the subject-matter. Among the methods of judicial
review the treatment of habeas corpus is scarcely adequate, and under
for damages” nuisance and negligence might be mentioned (p.
regards the question whether statutes bind the Crown, the distinction between
the statements of principle in
does not appear from p.
significant; in any event in the next edition account
no doubt be taken
of the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal (if that is allowed to stand)
where incidentally Denning L.J. states
the principle differently from his statement in
account of Parliamentary control over public corporations
and no reference is made to the periodical reviews foreshadowed
by Mr. Herbert Morrison as Leader
the House of Commons
misprint in the title of \$’infield’s
footnote to p.
civil liability. The right-hand page-heading in Chap.