ABSTRACT
Irrespective of the labelling attached to the body in question, there exists a duty to ‘act fairly’. The principles of fairness have not been given either universal or consistent interpretations. For example, in McInnes v Onslow Fane (1978), Megarry VC stated:
In Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (1985), the House of Lords once again turned to the apparent differences in the concepts, Lord Roskill seemingly rejecting the phrase ‘natural justice’ in favour of the duty to ‘act fairly’. Lord Roskill asserted that:
The principle of fairness can be clearly seen in the case of Re HK (An Infant) (1967), wherein it was held that, whilst immigration officers were not obliged to hold a hearing before deciding an immigrant’s status, they were nevertheless under an obligation to act fairly. The duty to give a hearing will be higher if a ‘legitimate expectation’ has been created in the mind of the complainant by the public body concerned.29
