Judgment No. SC 54/2018 Case No. SC 228/14 Reasonableness of Delegated Legislation One of the fundamental tenets of administrative law is that delegated legislation, including by-laws, may be reviewed and set aside on the ground of unreasonableness. This is the settled position not only in England, particularly after the famous case of Kruse v Johnson [1898] 2 QB 91, but also, albeit somewhat less consistently, under Roman-Dutch law. See generally Baxter: Administrative Law, at pp. 478-482. As observed by the learned author, “unreasonableness has always been a ground for review of delegated legislation but it was not until Kruse v Johnson that the concept was given an identifiable and specific meaning”. Kruse v Johnson concerned the validity of a by-law prohibiting any person from playing music or singing in any public place or highway within fifty yards of any dwelling-house after being requested by any constable, or an inmate of such house or his or her servant, to desist. The case was heard and determined by a specially constituted bench of seven judges appointed by the Chief Justice. It was held, with one dissenting opinion, that the by-law was valid. Lord Russell CJ, delivering the majority judgment of the court, opined as follows, at 99-100: “In this class of case it is right that the Courts should jealously watch the exercise of these powers, and guard against their unnecessary or unreasonable exercise to the public disadvantage. But, when the Court is called upon to consider the by-laws of public representative bodies clothed with the ample authority which I have described, and exercising that authority accompanied by the checks and safeguards which have been mentioned, I think the consideration of such by-laws ought to be approached from a different standpoint. They ought to be supported if possible. They ought to be, as has been said, ‘benevolently’ interpreted, and credit ought to be given to those who have to administer them that they will be reasonably administered. This involves the introduction of no new canon of construction. But, further, looking to the character of the body legislating under the delegated DISTRIBUTED BY VERITAS e-mail: veritas@mango.zw; website: www.veritaszim.net Veritas makes every effort to ensure the provision of reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied. 11