← All Authorities
United States Leading Case grounds irrationalitygrounds illegality

Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v State Farm Mutual

463 U.S. 29 (1983)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year1983
StatusBinding authority

Summary

An agency rescinding a rule must provide reasoned explanation; arbitrary and capricious review requires consideration of relevant factors and rational connection between facts and decision.

Key Principle

An agency must provide a reasoned explanation for rescinding a rule; the arbitrary and capricious standard requires consideration of relevant factors and a rational connection between facts and the decision.

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 Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v State Farm Mutual and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Motor Vehicle Manufacturers As...