Scope under ADJR Act? – Review under Federal Court

‘decision to which this Act applies’
- decision
- administrative character
- under an enactment

Are the ‘standards’ a decision?
S9 of the Act gives authority to the requirement that home loans must conform with ‘the standards’. In order for the standards to be characterised as a decision, it must be final or operative (Bond) or a condition precedent to the ultimate decision, been decision of Harry Mac to purchase or not purchase the mortgage. The ‘Standards’ released by ABC is not final or operative of whether Harry Mac would purchase the mortgage. Harry Mac is limited but not compelled to purchase only home loans which conform as it may also apply additional criteria ‘which in its opinion are suitable to promote housing affordability’. Therefore, this gives Harry Mac statutory discretion. Conformity to the standards is therefore not an essential condition leading to the ultimate decision.

Alternative source may be Judiciary Act s39B(1)- its scope is not restricted by the concept of ‘decision’ or ‘conduct.

Jurisdiction with respect in any matter…officer of the Commonwealth.
Between parties- includes dispute between parties to be determined by the court- exclusion of hypothetical questions from the matter concept.
Officer. Offices of the commonwealth- institutional nexus being between the decision-maker and the government

Is it of an administrative character?
- standards were formulated by Association of Banks and Creditors- its arguably not of an administrative character as it’s a decision which takes a general and rule-like form, as a standard. It is not directed at a particular individual but at a broader society of home buyers. The Standards raises questions of policy.

Under an enactment?

S9 gives statutory authority to the Standards whilst recognising that they are developed by Schedule 2 body. The Act does not give authority to ABC to establish those standards as ABC is a private, incorporated body and the standards were released prior to the Act. Therefore, if LAMB was to challenge the Standard as a decision made by the ABC, the standard is arguably not made under an enactment.

The ‘standards’ are not reviewable under the ADJR.

Alternatively- Judiciary Act- to have the Standards changed- need certiorari and perhaps mandamus- is there a jurisdictional error?- breach of natural justice