To get 1 law content daily, message LAW on WhatsApp: 9128523662. For example, the common law does not impose a general duty to give reasons for a decision, but under Article 6(1) a decision-maker must give a reasoned judgment so as to enable an affected individual to decide whether to appeal. The basic aim of the ‘Principles of Natural Justice’ is to prevent the contempt of justice which means arbitrary actions of the Executive or Judicial bodies :477 In the Singapore High Court decision Tang Kin Hwa v. Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board (2005), Judicial Commissioner Andrew Phang observed that the real likelihood test is in reality similar to that of reasonable suspicion. It is is an essential concept of divine law, which is based on the law of equity. It is also known as a rule of fair hearing. The judge should be neutral, impartial, and free from bias are the first and foremost prerequisites of natural justice. That will be placing too onerous a burden on the judge.  In addition, when a tribunal decides a case on a basis not raised or contemplated by the parties, or decides it without regarding the submissions and arguments made by the parties on the issues, this will amount to a breach of natural justice. 1. :101 In his opinion, suspicion suggests a belief that something that may not be provable could still be possible. INTRODUCTION Natural justice is a term of art that denotes specific procedural rights in the English Legal system and the systems of other nations based on it.This is the second main branch of natural justice which protect the little man from arbitrary administrative actions whenever his right to person or property is jeopardized. Audi alteram partem – It means both the parties/sides must be heard. However, the terms have similar meaning and are commonly used interchangeably. Natural Justice is also known as substantial justice, fundamental justice, universal justice orfair play in action. The right to a fair hearing requires that individuals should not be penalized by decisions affecting their rights or legitimate expectations unless they have been given prior notice of the case, a fair opportunity to answer it, and the opportunity to present their own case. :355, However, when a hearing requires the balancing of multiple polycentric issues such as natural justice and the protection of confidential information for national security reasons, both the concerns of public security and the right to a fair trial must be adequately met. On the basis of reciprocity, if one side is allowed to cross-examine his legal opponent at a hearing, the other party must also be given the same opportunity. No. While the term natural justice is often retained as a general concept, it has largely been replaced and extended by the general "duty to act fairly". The traditional English law recognizes two principles of natural justice- Rules of natural justice are the minimum standards of fair decision-makingimposed on persons or bodies acting in a judicial capacity. Reasonable suggests that the belief cannot be fanciful. On the other hand, mere absence from a hearing does not necessarily lead to undue prejudice. , However, in the cases of administrative acts or decisions under judicial review, the court can only intervene on the grounds of ultra vires,:401 hence making the judgment void. Another important international convention containing principle of Natural Rights into it is European Convention on Human Rights, 1998 which U/ Art 6 declares that, 1. whether there is a need for fairness between prisoners or between prisoners and prison officers.  The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom held that since the Al-Qaida Order made no provision for basic procedural fairness, it effectively deprived people designated under the order the fundamental right of access to a judicial remedy and hence was ultra vires the power conferred by the United Nations Act 1946 for the making of the Order. The main principles of natural justice are based on these two legal maxims: 1. This advice is not wrong in the context of a judicial act under review, where the judgment will be held valid unless reversed on appeal. In Ridge v Baldwin, a chief constable succeeded in having his dismissal from service declared void as he had not been given the opportunity to make a defence. It is a legal philosophy used in some jurisdictions in the determination of just, or fair, processes in legal proceedings.  As Lord Mustill famously held in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex p Doody (1993): "Since the person affected usually cannot make worthwhile representations without knowing what factors may weigh against his interests fairness will very often require that he is informed of the gist of the case which he has to answer. I am a law graduate. :582 Should a person not attend the hearing, even with adequate notice given, the adjudicator has the discretion to decide if the hearing should proceed. For consistency, the term procedural fairness is used in this fact sheet. :670 However, the test in Gough has been disapproved of in some Commonwealth jurisdictions. An employer is permitted to take account of an existing warning in deciding to dismiss an employee for a later act of misconduct. The right to be heard in answer to charges before an unbiased tribunal is illustrated in the Singapore case Tan Boon Chee David v. Medical Council of Singapore (1980).