Abstract:
The principle of equality is one of the fundamental principles of the Rule of Law. It is an essential part of good governance to follow this principle. The principle of equality requires the administrative body to treat similar cases similarly or justify a different treatment. In addition to that it requires consistent application of the law and consistency in decision-making. The present research paper examines to what extent courts can review decisions on the issue of unequal treatment and inconsistent decision-making. First the paper discusses the conception of the principle of equality within New Zealand’s administrative body. The New Zealand Bill of Rights does not provide a regulation of the principle of equality. However the principle of equality has fundamental value that has to be protected. Inconsistent and unequal decisions can be reviewed under the traditional grounds of review. There are several restrictions. Judicial review always has to find the balance between guaranteeing administrative discretion and protecting the individual’s rights. In context of the principle of equality the main issue is to balance two interests in judicial review. The analysis of case-law presents three categories of approaches, each having a different intensity on administrative discretion. It follows that there is not the perfect solution to deal with the principle of equality. The intensity review depends on the balance of administrative discretion and individual interest in protection of the principle of equality. The appropriate intensity of review has to be determined on a case by case basis. As a general rule both interests should have the best possible effect and the least possible restriction.
