Overview
LAWS12061 Administrative Law examines the legal rules, principles and procedures applied by the courts and administrative tribunals to review and check the exercise of executive power and the legality of administrative (executive) action and decision-making, especially insofar as they affect the rights, interests and legitimate expectations of individuals and the public. It also looks at the constitutional, statutory, common law and equitable remedies available against invalid executive action and decision-making. Topics you will study in this unit include: the organisation and structure of the administration; administrative law theory; common law and statutory avenues of judicial review at Commonwealth and State level; grounds of judicial review; remedies; crown immunity; the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; statutory review; and Freedom of Information. This unit meets the LPAB requirements for administrative law.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
Prerequisites: 24 credit points of law
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 3 - 2022
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Undergraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from Student evaluations
Unit material presented in an engaging and passionate manner: "I really enjoyed the way Jacob stepped through the tutorial questions and explained the concepts. It was the most organised and well-resourced law unit I've done in a while" "I have had many lecturers throughout my study, however, none have been as considerate or as engaging as Dr Deem. His methods were extremely easy to engage with and he would consistently endeavour to ensure everyone understood a topic before progressing"
Maintain and extend engagement with students in a manner that allows UC's passion for the subject matter to shine through.
Feedback from Student evaluations
Participation and engagement in tutorials could have been better: "There was a lack of participation in the tutorials. Some kind of incentive to attend would have been good. Despite this Jacob dealt with the challenge exceptionally well though and ran very informative tutorials"
As a matter of student equity it is not possible to offer incentives for tutorial attendance or participation. However, additional strategies are being explored to encourage participation in tutorial exercises.
Feedback from Student evaluations
Feedback on assessments was well-received: "Jacob provides some of the best feedback I have ever received on my assessments. I didn't expect to like Admin Law as much as I did!"
Live feedback following the advocacy exercise offers an excellent opportunity to provide detailed comments on students' performance in a caring manner that means it can be taken in its context. This practice should continue.
- Apply and critique the legal rules and procedures applied by the courts and administrative tribunals to review the legality of administrative (executive) action and decision-making.
- Analyse and apply the range of remedies available against invalid executive action and decision-making.
- Work individually and in groups in an effective, professional and reflective manner to develop persuasive oral and written arguments.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| 1 - Group Discussion - 10% | |||
| 2 - Practical Assessment - 40% | |||
| 3 - Take Home Exam - 50% | |||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| 1 - Communication | |||
| 2 - Problem Solving | |||
| 3 - Critical Thinking | |||
| 4 - Information Literacy | |||
| 5 - Team Work | |||
| 6 - Information Technology Competence | |||
| 7 - Cross Cultural Competence | |||
| 8 - Ethical practice | |||
| 9 - Social Innovation | |||
| 10 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | |||
Textbooks
Control of Government Action: Text, Cases and Commentary
6th edition (2022)
Authors: Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth
LexisNexis Butterworths
ISBN: 9780409353150
Binding: Paperback
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: Australian Guide to Legal Citation, 4th ed
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
j.deem@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Administrative Law: Principles, Theory, History
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 1
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Administrative Decisions
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 8 pg 402-424; Chapter 9 pg 496-516; Chapter 3 pg 143-149
Events and Submissions/Topic
Formation of groups for Mid-Term Assessment
Module/Topic
Access to Information
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 19; Chapter 21
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Merits Review
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 4
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Availability of Judicial Review
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 7; Chapter 8
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Grounds of Review: No evidence
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 13
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Written component of Mid-Term Assessment due Friday.
Module/Topic
Grounds of Review: Unauthorised Decision-Making
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 9
Events and Submissions/Topic
Mid-Term Assessment held this week. See sign-on sheet in Moodle for scheduled dates and times.
Mid-Term Assessment Due: Week 7 Tuesday (3 Jan 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Ground of Review: Statutory Purpose; Relevant and Irrelevant Considerations
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 11
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Ground of Review: Natural Justice
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 10
Events and Submissions/Topic
Group discussion task due
Group Discussion Due: Week 9 Friday (20 Jan 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Ground of Review: Unreasonableness
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 14
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Ground of Review: Remedies
Chapter
Robin Creyke, Matthew Groves, John McMillan and Mark Smyth, Control of Government Action: Text, Cases & Commentary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 6th ed. 2022), Chapter 18
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Revision
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Take home exam
1 Group Discussion
· This task is completed in groups of four – you and your team member from the Mid-Term Task, and another pair (groups will be allocated following the Mid-Term task).
· As a group, you will critically reflect on your advocacy task, discussing what you think went well, and where you think you could have improved.
· Each group member should provide at least two comments – one reflecting on their own experiences, and one reflecting on at least one other group member’s moot.
Week 9 Friday (20 Jan 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Week 11 Friday (3 Feb 2023)
· This task is designed to be reflective and constructive. It is important that you engage with your peers in a constructive, professional manner. Great reflections are actionable – pointing out something that worked to continue doing, or something that can be improved next time. An example is provided at this end of this document.
· Your mark (out of 10) is awarded based on the quality of your reflection, and the constructiveness of your comments towards others. Mere descriptions of what happened or unactionable comments are not rewarded highly.
A detailed rubric is available on Moodle.
- Work individually and in groups in an effective, professional and reflective manner to develop persuasive oral and written arguments.
2 Practical Assessment
· This task requires you to form groups of two. If you need help finding a partner, see the forum post on Moodle.
· As a pair, you will complete a submission to the AAT (‘Task 1: Written Component’) due Tuesday 3 January 2022 and an oral advocacy task (‘Task 2: Advocacy Component’) which will take place in Week 7. Compared to other Terms, this timing is an extension to account for the disruptions over Christmas. Make sure you contact your partner early and start this task well before the deadline.
· Record your group membership in the spreadsheet linked under the Assessment tab. This spreadsheet also serves as a timetable for the Advocacy Component.
· Sign-ups to available slots are on a first-come, first-served basis.
· It is not possible to offer time slots outside the times listed in the spreadsheet. This task is given to you with plenty of notice to make arrangements with work, etc so that you can complete this assessment task.
· It is your responsibility to notify the Unit Coordinator of any circumstances that might impact your ability to complete this task as soon as possible. Where appropriate, accommodations may be made but this will be decided on a case-by-case basis and is not guaranteed.
· As this is a group assignment and students are reliant on each other to contribute to the live advocacy exercise via Zoom, extensions are not permitted.
· Make sure you are in a group and are signed up in the spreadsheet by 5pm Friday Week 2.
· On Monday Week 3, I will allocate people to a group and time slot if they are not already in a group. Being allocated to a particular day/time is not grounds to request an accommodation.
Tasks:
Each group must complete the following two tasks in relation to their client:
Task 1 (Written Component) (10 marks): Prepare a written submission to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. This task is completed as a group and is awarded a group mark. Senior Counsel makes 1 submission on behalf of the group on Moodle by Friday. of Vacation Week.
Task 2 (Advocacy Component) (30 marks): Participate in an advocacy task in an Administrative Appeals Tribunal setting. This task is completed via a live Zoom session at a date/time in Week 6. Senior and Junior Counsel will each present on an administrative law issue. This component is marked individually.
Week 7 Tuesday (3 Jan 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Week 9 Monday (16 Jan 2023)
Task 1 (Written Component) - 10 marks
- Identification of issues and relevant rules/principles - 5 marks
- Critical analysis and application - 3 marks
- Communication - 2 marks
Both group members receive the same mark for Task 1
Task 2 (Moot Component) - 30 marks
- Identification of issues and relevant rules/principles - 5 marks
- Critical analysis and application - 12 marks
- Communication and persuasion - 8 marks
- Collaboration and teamwork - 5 marks
Task 2 is marked individually
See Moodle for full marking rubric
- Apply and critique the legal rules and procedures applied by the courts and administrative tribunals to review the legality of administrative (executive) action and decision-making.
- Analyse and apply the range of remedies available against invalid executive action and decision-making.
- Work individually and in groups in an effective, professional and reflective manner to develop persuasive oral and written arguments.
3 Take Home Exam
This individual written assessment involves answering questions on a hypothetical scenario, covering any of the topics raised in this unit. Students have a limited timeframe to submit their answers on Moodle. Students will be advised of the exact time for the assessment via Moodle once the examination timetable has been finalised.
Responses to the assessment must be submitted before the deadline. Late submissions will not be accepted and will be automatically awarded a mark of zero. It is not possible to grant extensions for this assessment (Accessibility adjustments still apply). Exam conditions apply to all take home papers.
Students will be marked based on their individual submission according to the following criteria: correct and thorough identification of the legal issue(s) (10%) and rules/legal principles (30%); correct and thorough analysis and application of the rules and legal principles to the legal issue(s) and the facts (40%); well thought-out conclusion (10%); and quality of the language usage and observance of proper structure, format, and instructions (10%). A detailed marking rubric is available on the Moodle site.
- Apply and critique the legal rules and procedures applied by the courts and administrative tribunals to review the legality of administrative (executive) action and decision-making.
- Analyse and apply the range of remedies available against invalid executive action and decision-making.
- Work individually and in groups in an effective, professional and reflective manner to develop persuasive oral and written arguments.
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
