The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations in Administrative Law: Balancing Fairness and Public Interest

Abstract

The doctrine of legitimate expectations occupies an important position within contemporary administrative law. It seeks to protect individuals who have reasonably relied upon representations, practices or assurances made by public authorities while preserving the ability of governments to respond to changing public needs. The doctrine therefore reflects a fundamental tension between administrative flexibility and legal certainty. This article examines the conceptual foundations and judicial development of legitimate expectations from a comparative public-law perspective. It distinguishes procedural and substantive legitimate expectations and analyses the circumstances in which courts may intervene when public authorities depart from established representations or practices. Particular attention is given to fairness, reliance, consistency, proportionality and the public interest. The article argues that legitimate expectations should not be understood as creating an absolute right to the continuation of governmental policies. Rather, the doctrine provides a structured mechanism through which courts can assess whether a public authority has acted fairly when departing from a representation upon which an individual or group has reasonably relied. The article concludes that a principled application of the doctrine can strengthen administrative accountability while preserving sufficient flexibility for governments to pursue legitimate changes in public policy.