Ultra Vires CASES

In English law, ultra vires means “beyond powers”. A decision is ultra vires when a public authority, statutory body, or person exercising delegated power acts outside the limits laid down by law. The doctrine underpins judicial review: courts supervise public bodies to ensure they act within the legal authority Parliament (or another lawful source) has given them. Ultra vires also arises for delegated legislation that exceeds its enabling Act. In company law the strict “objects” version has been largely neutralised by modern statutes, but the idea survives for charities and other bodies with limited purposes.

Definition And Principles

Every public decision-maker must stay within the legal four corners of their power. Acting outside those limits is unlawful and liable to be quashed. Ultra vires is not confined to naked excess of power: it includes misusing a power for an improper purpose, taking into account irrelevant considerations or ignoring relevant ones, fettering discretion by rigid policies, sub-delegating without authority, failing to follow mandatory procedures, and making errors of law that go to the scope of the power. Where Convention rights are engaged, proportionality may be used to test whether the interference stays within lawful limits.

Ultra Vires In Practice (Illustrative Categories)

• Exceeding an express limit: granting a licence or imposing a charge that the statute does not permit; acting outside geographic or subject-matter bounds.
• Improper purpose: using a planning or licensing power to raise revenue or to penalise critics rather than to regulate in the public interest.
• Relevant/irrelevant considerations: ignoring mandatory factors (e.g., safety evidence) or giving decisive weight to matters the statute does not allow.
• Fettering discretion: applying a blanket policy without considering whether a case calls for an exception.
• Procedural ultra vires: failing to consult where required, not giving a fair hearing, or breaching statutory publication/notice steps.
• Sub-delegation: passing a discretionary decision to a third party where the Act does not authorise delegation.
• Delegated legislation: regulations that go beyond, contradict, or frustrate the purpose of the enabling Act.

Corporate and charitable contexts

For companies, the classic “objects clause” ultra vires doctrine has been largely disapplied: most companies have unrestricted objects, and acts are generally valid even if outside stated purposes. By contrast, charities, statutory corporations, and other purpose-limited bodies must stay within their objects or statutory remit; acts outside those purposes can be void or require court sanction.

Consequences and remedies

• Judicial review: the High Court can quash ultra vires decisions, restrain proposed action, or require reconsideration. In suitable cases it may issue declarations or mandatory orders. Damages are uncommon absent a separate cause of action.
• Delegated legislation: ultra vires instruments may be declared invalid. Courts prefer precise remedies (e.g., disapplying particular provisions) where appropriate.
• Private law interfaces: ultra vires conduct can found tort claims (e.g., misfeasance in public office) or restitution where money was unlawfully demanded without authority.
• Prospective/limited relief: modern practice allows, in suitable cases, suspended or prospective quashing orders to prevent undue disruption while unlawfulness is remedied.

Practical Importance

For claimants: identify the source of power, the precise limit allegedly exceeded, and the evidence showing improper purpose, irrelevant/relevant considerations, or procedural defects. Keep time limits in mind: judicial review must be brought promptly and within the short statutory windows that apply in some fields (e.g., planning).

For public bodies: record the statutory purpose, the factors considered, any policy and how exceptions were evaluated, and the consultation or hearing given—these materials often decide lawfulness.

For drafters of delegated legislation: map each clause to the enabling provisions and the Act’s purpose; avoid widening powers by implication or contradicting the primary legislation.

See also: Judicial review; Illegality (grounds of review); Improper purpose; Relevant and irrelevant considerations; Fettering discretion; Procedural fairness; Proportionality; Sub-delegation; Delegated legislation; Charities (objects and powers); Misfeasance in public office.