Dr. Stephen Thomson is an Associate Professor and Director of the PhD and JSD Programmes at the School of Law, City University of Hong Kong.  He is a Legal Adviser to the Ombudsman of Hong Kong, a member of the Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights Committee of the Law Society of Hong Kong, and an examiner on the Overseas Lawyers Qualification Examination.  Dr. Thomson is the author of the leading text on ‘Administrative Law in Hong Kong’, and also the author of the only book to have been written on equitable jurisdiction in Scotland, which has been cited with approval in the supreme civil court in Scotland.  He holds a Ph.D. in judicial review from the University of Edinburgh (UK), and has practical legal and commercial experience, having worked at a UK law firm and acted on a consultancy and advisory basis to law firms, private clients and public bodies in Hong Kong and the UK.

This course looks at the exercise of discretion (how to make decisions) by public decision-makers in the context of judicial review in Hong Kong.  It begins by examining what discretion is and some of its underlying ideas and concepts.

The course then explores three main areas in which it is considered how public decision-makers should exercise discretion to reduce the likelihood of being successfully judicially reviewed.  These are:

1. The role of policies, how they should be formulated and how they should be applied;
2. Relevance of considerations, failure to take into account relevant considerations and taking into account irrelevant considerations; and
3. Reasonableness, rationality and cogency of the exercise of discretion.

In each of these areas, we will consider common pitfalls that can lead decision-makers to violate one or more grounds of judicial review, and what decision-makers can do to minimise the likelihood of being successfully judicially reviewed.

While this is plainly of interest to practitioners representing or working for public decision-makers, it is also very useful for practitioners representing applicants for judicial review in terms of understanding the legal obligations of public decision-makers in this area.  Your seminar leader will use accessible, easy-to-understand explanations and examples, and be pleased to answer your questions.  All welcome.

Procedural fairness and procedural impropriety are increasingly important grounds for judicial review.  From licence application procedures to regulatory decisions, immigration refusals to disciplinary decisions, there are many opportunities for public decision-makers to go wrong procedurally  The law applies strict standards of procedural fairness and procedural impropriety which must be observed by public decision-makers  A sound understanding of this important ground of judicial review is necessary, both for government and public decision-makers to keep themselves right, and applicants who may seek to enforce this ground in judicial review.

This seminar will take delegates through the main aspects of the law on procedural fairness and procedural impropriety, including the right to an oral hearing, the right to be represented, the duty to give reasons for a decision, and bias/partiality  Real cases will be used to explain and illustrate the main points and your seminar leader will be delighted to answer your questions on the day  The session will be useful for solicitors in both the public and private sectors; and to those who both seek to launch a judicial review application or who may find themselves on the receiving end of one  Come along and learn from this interactive seminar  All welcome!

• What is discretion?
• The role of policies in decision-making
• How should policies be formulated?
• How should policies be applied?
• What are relevant considerations and how should they be folded into the decision-making process?
• What are irrelevant considerations and how should they be excluded from the decision-making process?
• What is unreasonableness and irrationality review? How does it work in practice?
• How can decision-makers exercise discretion in a way which minimises the prospects of being successfully reviewed on the basis of unreasonableness and irrationality?

• Up-to-date coverage of procedural fairness and procedural impropriety as grounds for judicial review
• Explanation of the key aspects of procedural fairness and procedural impropriety: the right to an oral hearing, the right to be represented, the duty to give reasons for a decision, and bias/partiality
• Aimed at applicants and respondents; those working in private practice, and those working in government and the public sector
• Use of real cases to explain and illustrate the main points
• Accessible and easy to understand explanations