Paul P. Craig (University of Oxford - Faculty of Law) has posted Book Review: Comparative Administrative Law and Political Structure (2017 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Study of comparative administrative law reveals commonality and difference between the systems studied. That is axiomatic and self-evident. The depth of the resulting similarities and divergences may be difficult to estimate, the explanation for them even more so. It is to Peter Cane’s credit that he tackles these difficult issues in his recent book ( Administrative Power: An Historical Comparison), which examines control over administrative power in the US, England and Australia.
It is a book of considerable scholarship, based on significant research and full of insight on particular issues within administrative law. The scholarship merits respect, and this is so notwithstanding the fact that there are, in my view, problems with the methodology and its application.
The review begins by setting out the central thesis of the book. This is followed by consideration of the methodological problems with the underlying thesis. The remainder of the review discusses the application of Cane's methodology in four areas that are central to administrative law: rulemaking, review for error of law, review of discretion and damages liability.