“Natural justice requires fair hearing before decisions affecting individual rights.”
Lapointe was a member of a police benevolent association who was expelled from membership without being given an opportunity to be heard regarding the charges against him. The association's decision affected his pension and benefit rights.
Whether natural justice required that Lapointe be given an opportunity to be heard before being expelled from the association, despite the association's internal rules not explicitly providing for such a hearing.
The Privy Council held in favour of Lapointe. He should have been given an opportunity to be heard before expulsion.
This early case established foundational principles of procedural fairness that continue to underpin modern administrative law. It demonstrates that natural justice applies broadly, not just to obviously judicial decisions.
You're reading the free summary of Natural Justice — Lapointe v L'Association de Bienfaisance et de Retraite de la Police de Montréal. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
Lapointe v L'Association de Bienfaisance et de Retraite de la Police de Montréal [1906] AC 535 (PC)
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.