Introduction
In the UK, questions of social or ‘distributive’ justice are usually treated as exercising a type of repulsion effect on the reach of legal accountability. Public authorities enjoy a wide margin of discretion when deciding how to allocate resources to different social groups, while courts play a very limited role in reviewing whether such decisions are rational, compatible with individual rights, or otherwise comply with principles of justice.
However, strong arguments can be made that excessive restrictions have been imposed on the scope of judicial review in this context. A good case can be made that courts should play a greater role in holding public authorities to account for how the substance of their resource allocation decisions impacts upon the lives of individuals, especially when such decisions expose individuals to a risk of destitution, deprive them of support essential to maintain a dignified existence, or otherwise have a grave impact on their well-being. In general, it is time to reconsider the relationship that currently exists between legal modes of accountability, resource allocation decision-making, and the concept of social justice.
B.
More on the topic Introduction:
- Introduction
- Introduction
- Introduction
- Introduction
- Introduction
- INTRODUCTION TO REASONING IN THE ΠFΓ EXAM
- Introduction
- Introduction
- Introduction
- Introduction