<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>01672pab a2200181 454500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="008">180718b2011   xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Hoehn, Felix</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Privatisation and the boundaries of judicial review</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">2011</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">p.73-95.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="362" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Mar</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Can a public authority avoid public law requirements, such as obligation to act fairly, b y "contracting out" the performance of its functions? In Societe de I'assurance automobile du Quebec v. Cyr, the Supreme Court of Canada said "no", but it did not explain how far the Court will move the boundaries of judicial review to adapt to the growth of the private role in governance. However, there is reason to believe that the Court is moving towards a functional approach in defining state power and the location of the boundary between public and private law. This promises to be more coherent and effective than the piecemeal functional approaches that have emerged in the United States and the United Kingdom. A functional approach will prevent the lines of legal accountability to Parliament, the legislatures, the electorate and the courts from being severed by a contract between a public authority and a private party. At the same time, the emerging functional approach accepts that public law remedies should generally not be available if private law offers an adequate remedy or if applying public law would generate disproportionate costs to efficiency or would damage other public law objectives or private interests. - Reproduced.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Privatisation</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Judiciary</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Canadian Public Administration</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">N</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="909" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">91550</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">91550</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">91550</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2018-07-19</subfield>
    <subfield code="h">Volume no: 54, Issue no: 1</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">AR92010</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2018-07-19</subfield>
    <subfield code="w">2018-07-19</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">AR</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
