體育總會有可能屬於具公共效能的私人機構(a private body serving public functions/statutory functions)

漫畫 by: zaldo

07一篇法律界 blogger 好專業性文章重溫:http://daimones.blogspot.com/2007/04/katana.html :


體育總會有可能屬於具公共效能的私人機構(a private body serving public functions/statutory functions)。以公司形式成立的，不一定是私人機構。當然接受政府資助金是公共機構的特點之一，

在Hong Kong Polytechnic University v Next Magazine(理工大學訴壹週刊)[1997]7 HKPLR 286中，上訴庭指出除政府資助外，公共機構的行事還需要以公眾利益(public benefit)作依歸及某程度上受政府監管。若體總還符合以上兩個條件，它就真正是公共機構。


體總在甄選或考核申請者的參賽資格時，把一些不應被考慮的因素如私人恩怨也併入考慮之列時，則有違自然公義(natural justice)，法律上稱為有違Wednesbury reasonableness:

The court is entitled to investigate the action of the local authority with a view to seeing whether they have taken into account matters which they ought not to take into account, or conversely have refused to take into account and once that question is answered in favour of the local authority, it may still be possible to say, although the local authority have kept within the four corners of the matters which they ought to consider, they have nevertheless come to a conclusion so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have come to it.(Associated Provincial Pictures House v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223)

在英國有一類似案例，案情是英國政府因不滿南菲的種族隔離政策，「要求」一足球會擱置到南菲參與比賽，在遭拒絕後，竟禁止該足球會使用政府的足球場練習及比賽，最後有關行政決定被法院覆核，且該決定被裁定為濫用權力。(Wheeter v Leicester County Council [1985] AC 1054)