Justifying compensation for frustrated legitimate expectations

Brown, Alexander (2011) Justifying compensation for frustrated legitimate expectations. Law and Philosophy, 30 (6). pp. 699-728.

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

That government agencies and public bodies can be liable for damages when they induce and then frustrate people’s legitimate expectations is an important and distinctive feature of administrative law in Europe. This article sets out to establish a set of moral principles and ideals that might justify this legal institution. The notion of security of expectations found in the work of utilitarian writers provides a starting point. Having examined the strengths and weaknesses of this approach, I then turn to consider an alternative argument based on finding a solution to the problem of credible commitments. Finally, I look for suitable moral arguments in the liberal and Kantian political theorising of John Rawls. I argue that if we see the function of the rule of law as not merely to maximise aggregate utility and to make policymakers’ decisions seem credible but also to ensure Justice as Fairness for individuals, then this provides a more robust and satisfactory way to justify the liability of public bodies for legitimate expectations they induce and then frustrate.

Item Type:	Article
Faculty \ School:	Faculty of Arts and Humanities > School of Political, Social and International Studies (former - to 2014)
UEA Research Groups:	Faculty of Arts and Humanities > Research Groups > Policy & Politics Faculty of Arts and Humanities > Research Groups > Political, Social and International Studies
Depositing User:	Alexander Brown
Date Deposited:	07 Oct 2011 08:14
Last Modified:	17 Jan 2024 01:20
URI:	https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/34962
DOI:	10.1007/s10982-011-9108-z

Actions (login required)

View Item