Bromley LBC v GLC, [1983] 1 AC 768

Can You Answer This?

Practice with real exam questions

Norton City Council has broad powers under the Public Transport and Clean Streets Act 2025 to manage local transportation and environmental policies. In an effort to reduce pollution and traffic congestion, the council introduced drastic fare reductions on all municipal bus routes. They aim to finance this scheme by significantly raising local property taxes. However, local businesses and residents have raised concerns that the initiative extends beyond the council’s statutory authority, questioning whether the Act truly permits sweeping fare reductions funded by disproportionate tax hikes. Additionally, critics argue the council’s fiduciary duty to taxpayers is undermined by the potential strain on municipal finances.


Which of the following is the best assessment of the Council’s legal position under these circumstances?

Introduction

The principle of ultra vires is fundamental to administrative law. It dictates that public bodies, deriving their powers from statute, must act within the confines of those powers. Bromley London Borough Council v Greater London Council [1983] 1 AC 768 stands as a significant House of Lords decision that supports this principle, specifically regarding the interpretation and application of statutory duties and discretionary powers conferred upon local authorities. This case examined the extent to which a local authority could pursue social policies, affecting financial considerations, under the umbrella of its statutory transport duties. The key requirements for lawful action by public bodies demand strict compliance with the statutory language and purpose, ensuring actions remain within the boundaries of the conferred powers.

The GLC's Fares Fair Policy and Statutory Interpretation

The Greater London Council (GLC), under the Transport (London) Act 1969, held responsibility for London's transport system. The GLC implemented a "Fares Fair" policy, substantially reducing fares and increasing rates. This policy aimed to encourage public transport usage and alleviate traffic congestion, purportedly aligning with the Act's objective of providing an "integrated, efficient, and economic system of public passenger transport." However, the House of Lords determined that the GLC’s interpretation of the Act was flawed. Their Lordships held that the GLC's broad interpretation of "economic" as including social and political considerations exceeded the statutory remit. The Act primarily focused on financial and operational efficiency, not broad social policy objectives.

Fiduciary Duty and Ratepayers

A critical aspect of the Bromley case revolved around the GLC's fiduciary duty to ratepayers. The House of Lords affirmed that the GLC, when exercising its statutory powers, owed a duty to its ratepayers to manage finances responsibly. The "Fares Fair" policy, which necessitated a significant increase in rates to fund the reduced fares, was deemed a breach of this duty. Implementing a policy with substantial financial implications based on a strained interpretation of statutory powers constituted a disregard for the ratepayers' interests. Lord Wilberforce, in his judgment, highlighted the importance of balancing statutory duties with financial prudence.

The Doctrine of Ultra Vires and its Application

The Bromley judgment serves as a clear application of the ultra vires doctrine. By exceeding the statutory parameters of its transport powers, the GLC acted unlawfully. The House of Lords stated that public bodies cannot extend their powers beyond the express or implied provisions of the statute from which they derive authority. This principle safeguards against arbitrary exercises of power and ensures accountability within the legal framework. Lord Scarman’s judgment provided further clarity on the limits of discretionary powers within statutory frameworks.

Implications for Local Government and Public Bodies

Bromley LBC v GLC holds wide-ranging implications for local government and public bodies more generally. It supports the principle of legality and the importance of strict statutory interpretation. Public bodies must act within the boundaries of their statutory powers, and any attempt to expand these powers through a broad or purposive interpretation that is not supported by the statutory language will be considered ultra vires. The case highlights the necessity for public bodies to balance social policy objectives with financial responsibility and respect for their statutory duties.

The Significance of Bromley in Administrative Law

Bromley remains a key case in administrative law. It provides a clear illustration of the ultra vires doctrine in practice and serves as a precedent for subsequent judicial review cases. The judgment clarifies the limitations on the discretionary powers of public bodies and underlines the central role of statutory interpretation in determining the legality of their actions. This case emphasizes the importance of parliamentary sovereignty, reaffirms the principle that public bodies derive their authority from statute and cannot act beyond the scope of that authority. Subsequent cases, such as Hazell v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council [1992] 2 AC 1, further developed the principles surrounding local authority powers and financial responsibilities, building upon the basis laid by Bromley.

Conclusion

Bromley LBC v GLC significantly affected the understanding and application of administrative law principles. The case provides a concrete example of the ultra vires doctrine, emphasizing the limitations placed on public bodies by their enabling statutes. The House of Lords judgment offers clarity on the relationship between statutory interpretation, discretionary powers, and the fiduciary duty owed by local authorities to ratepayers. The principle established in Bromley, that public bodies cannot exceed the boundaries of their statutory powers, continues to shape the legal field and serves as an important precedent for ensuring lawful and accountable governance. The case’s enduring relevance affirms the importance of respecting statutory constraints when exercising public powers, demonstrating the judicial commitment to upholding the principle of legality within administrative law.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of December 2024. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

Practice. Learn. Excel.

Features designed to support your job and test preparation

Question Bank

Access 100,000+ questions that adapt to your performance level and learning style.

Performance Analytics

Track your progress across topics and identify knowledge gaps with comprehensive analytics and insights.

Multi-Assessment Support

Prepare for multiple exams simultaneously, from academic tests to professional certifications.

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal