Central Criminal Courts image
This site is based on Disciplinary and Regulatory Proceedings, 8th Edition
Disciplinary and Regulatory Proceedings is the leading work on this important and dynamic area of law. For 20 years it has provided authoritative guidance to lawyers, tribunals, and other experts dealing with professional discipline and regulation.

Void or voidable?

Until recently there has been doubt over whether a breach of the rules of natural justice rendered a finding void or voidable. See the cases of Durayappah v Fernando and Others [1967] 2 All ER 152, Durayappah v Fernando and Others, F Hoffman-La Roche & Co AG and Others v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Grierson, R (on the application of) v Atlantic Broadcasting Ltd & Ors and Chief Constable of the North Wales Police v Evans andCalvin v Carr and Others.

It has now been held to be a settled principle of law that the action of a public authority in dismissing the holder of a public office in excess of its powers, or in breach of natural justice, is as between the public authority and the office-holder, null, void and without legal effect, at any rate once a court of competent jurisdiction so declares or orders. However, Since public law remedies are, for the most part, discretionary, it necessarily follows that a claimant may be disabled from obtaining the full relief he seeks whether on grounds of lack of standing, delay or his own conduct, or grounds pertaining to the facts of the particular case. (McLaughlin v Governor of the Cayman Islands McLaughlin v Governor of the Cayman Islands [2007] UKPC 50.)


6th Edition » | Chapter 2