Jurisdictional fact are facts which must objectively exist before a statutory power can be exercised by a decision-maker. They are created by and operate in the context of government authority produced by statute and are linked to the legal concept of jurisdiction.[1] A number of scholars have tried, with limited success, to categorise them.[2][3][4]
In the United Kingdom, the seminal definition is the English law case of Anisminic.[5]
Some countriesm, like Singapore, India and Canada that have written constitutions, can be constrained in their definition of "jurisdictional facts" and due to the restraints in their constitutions.[6][failed verification]
In Australia the High Court has been reticent to define jurisdictional facts[7] finding that "The principles as to how one determines whether something is a jurisdictional fact are settled but necessarily imprecise. That must be so." and that "to define Jurisdictional fact is neither necessary nor desirable."[8] Despite this, Australian courts have attempted to define jurisdictional fact, including:
These criteria of jurisdiction are created by and operate through statute,[13] and may be subjective,[14] or objective in nature and may also be a complex of interactions.[15][16] but they must not be illogical,[14] or capricious and must be actual.[17]
In Singapore the concept is called "precedent fact errors".