<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1979 (7) TMI 250 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286034</link>
    <description>A statutory power affecting citizenship had to be exercised consistently with natural justice: the applicant was entitled to notice of the proposed refusal and a reasonable opportunity to answer it, and a refusal made without that hearing was a nullity. The residual public-policy words in the proviso to section 7 were inconsistent with the Constitution because they left eligibility to the Minister&#039;s subjective satisfaction rather than objective criteria, and were therefore void. An ouster clause could not shield a decision made without jurisdiction, so judicial review remained available. As valid statutory grounds were not excluded on the record, the proper relief was reconsideration according to law, not immediate registration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2020 12:16:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=603355" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (7) TMI 250 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286034</link>
      <description>A statutory power affecting citizenship had to be exercised consistently with natural justice: the applicant was entitled to notice of the proposed refusal and a reasonable opportunity to answer it, and a refusal made without that hearing was a nullity. The residual public-policy words in the proviso to section 7 were inconsistent with the Constitution because they left eligibility to the Minister&#039;s subjective satisfaction rather than objective criteria, and were therefore void. An ouster clause could not shield a decision made without jurisdiction, so judicial review remained available. As valid statutory grounds were not excluded on the record, the proper relief was reconsideration according to law, not immediate registration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286034</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>