LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – Fair Hearing – Irrelevance of Obviousness of Offence
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is no answer in any case in which a person is entitled to a hearing to say that their offense was so obvious that any hearing would have been a mere formality; when the rule of natural justice is observed and trial proceeded with, it often turns out that the whole affair was a conspiratorial fabrication or at best based on mere suspicion; once a breach of natural justice has been properly raised, it is not a relevant consideration to inquire whether the court or tribunal in fact decided rightly.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"It is no answer in any case in which a person is entitled to a hearing to say that his offence was so obvious that any hearing would have been a mere formality. For, quite often, when the rule of natural justice is observed and a trial proceeded with, it turns out that the whole affair was a conspiratorial fabrication or at best based on mere suspicion. This is why once a breach of natural justice has been properly raised in any proceeding it is not a relevant consideration to inquire whether the court or tribunal in fact decided rightly."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Fair hearing is an absolute right not defeated by claims that: guilt is obvious, hearing would be formality, outcome is predetermined, or the decision would have been the same anyway. These arguments are rejected because: (1) apparently obvious cases often reveal fabrication, conspiracy, or mere suspicion when properly examined; (2) hearings provide opportunity to present defenses, challenge evidence, and expose weaknesses in allegations; (3) fair hearing is the right itself—not merely means to a different outcome. Once natural justice breach is established, courts don’t ask: “would you have won with a hearing?” or “was the decision correct despite the breach?” The breach itself vitiates proceedings regardless of decision correctness or obvious guilt. This principle protects: even seemingly guilty persons’ procedural rights, against complacency about “obvious” cases, and the hearing process’s value in uncovering truth. Fair hearing isn’t luxury for close cases—it’s fundamental right for all. This prevents: administrative convenience overriding rights, prejudgment, and denial of hearing based on assumed guilt.