Re HK [1967] 2 QB 617 (CA)

Facts

• HK, a Chinese citizen, arrived in the United Kingdom seeking entry.
• An immigration officer refused HK’s application for entry.
• The officer did not inform HK of the reasons for refusal, nor was HK given an opportunity to respond to any concerns about his admissibility.
• The case addressed the extent of the immigration officer’s powers under immigration legislation and whether those powers included a duty of procedural fairness.

Issues

1. Whether an immigration officer, when exercising statutory powers to refuse entry, is bound by an implied duty to act fairly.
2. Whether procedural fairness requires affected individuals to be informed of reasons for adverse administrative decisions and given an opportunity to respond.

Decision

• The Court of Appeal held that the immigration officer acted unlawfully due to procedural unfairness.
• It was determined that, despite the lack of an express statutory requirement for a hearing, the principles of natural justice demanded that HK be notified of concerns and allowed to address them.
• The decision clarified that administrative decisions are reviewable for unfairness even where the relevant statute is silent on procedural protections.

Legal Principles

• Administrative decision-makers are subject to an implied duty to act fairly, grounded in the principles of natural justice.
• Statutory discretion must be exercised in accordance with fairness, even absent explicit statutory provisions mandating such fairness.
• The duty of fairness includes informing affected individuals of reasons for adverse decisions and permitting a response.
• The requirements of fairness vary according to the circumstances but the core principle remains constant.
• The case contributed to the doctrine of legitimate expectations, strengthening the need for fair and consistent treatment by public authorities.
• Re HK supported the basis for the principle of proportionality by aligning fairness with proportional administrative action.

Conclusion

Re HK [1967] 2 QB 617 established that immigration officers and other public authorities must exercise statutory powers fairly, ensuring procedural fairness as a universal standard in administrative law, regardless of explicit statutory requirements. The case remains a leading authority for the protection of individual rights and the maintenance of the rule of law in administrative decision-making.