← All Authorities
United States Leading Case grounds illegality

Auer v Robbins

519 U.S. 452 (1997)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year1997
StatusBinding authority

Summary

An agency's interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation is entitled to controlling deference unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.

Key Principle

An agency's interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation is entitled to deference unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.

Area of Law

public-law

Related Cases

CPCF v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2015) 255 CLR 514

The Maritime Powers Act 2013 authorised detention and return of asylum seekers at sea; executive power extends to removal of non-citizens from Australian waters.

Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135

A reasonable apprehension of bias arises where a council officer who lodged a complaint against a dog owner also participated in the decision to order destruction of the dog.

Plaintiff M47/2012 v Director-General of Security (2012) 251 CLR 1

Ministerial power to detain and remove non-citizens under the Migration Act must be exercised in accordance with the Act; adverse ASIO security assessments do not compel indefinite detention.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Auer v Robbins and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Auer v Robbins