What is the difference between discretionary income and disposable income?
Disposable income represents the amount of money you have for spending and saving after you pay your income taxes. Discretionary income is the money that an individual or a family has to invest, save, or spend after taxes and necessities are paid. Discretionary income comes from your disposable income.
What are discretionary responsibilities?
Discretionary responsibilityis voluntary and guided by a company’s desire to make social contributions not mandated by economics, law, or ethics. Discretionary activities include philanthropic contributions that offer no direct financial payback to the company and are not expected.
What is meant by discretionary powers?
(often in the plural: discretionary powers) a power that a person can use if that person thinks that it is suitable given the situation and circumstances. “The Administrator shall have the discretionary power to determine all questions arising in connection with the administration of the Plan.”
What are the discretionary power of a government?
Professor Harold Laski has defined discretionary power as that authority of the executive « whether in matters of sub- stance or of procedure or both, which it is free to exercise as it thinks fit ». *1 Legally, it is the power to exercise a discre- ‘ tion with which the courts cannot interfere.
Who exercises discretionary powers?
The judges of the Supreme Court enjoy wide discretionary powers under Article 142. And while exercising these powers the supreme court has made good to many cases.
Is discretionary authority necessary?
Administrative agencies must exercise discretionary powers in accordance to legal requirements. Generally, statutes expressly confer right to exercise discretionary power to administrative agencies. However, administrative agencies’ duties necessarily include the right to exercise discretion.
What is an example of discretionary authority?
Discretionary Authority Examples include paying subsidies, giving grants to states, and devising rules and regulations.
What is abuse of discretionary power?
When a discretionary power is conferred on an authority, the said authority must exercise that power after applying its mind to the fact and circumstances of the case in hand. (b) That the authority has not exercised its discretion properly– “abuse of discretion”.
Why is administrative discretion needed?
Use of discretion becomes necessary, especially in situations in which imme- diate action is needed. For the most part, frontline or street-level bureaucrats work in situations where discretion is required because the rules and laws are too complicated and may not be adequate in specific cases.
What is the concept of administrative discretion?
In public administration, administrative discretion refers to the flexible exercising of judgment and decision making allowed to public administrators. For example, a public official has administrative discretion when he or she has the freedom to make a choice among potential courses of action.
Who is an ombudsman and give at least 2 characteristics?
i) Ombudsman refers only is an independent and non-partisan officer of the legislature who supervise the administration. ii) He deals with specific complaints from the public against administrative injustice and maladministration.
How do you prove abuse of discretion?
Some common examples of abuse of discretion are:
- Not allowing a certain witness to testify.
- Showing bias toward the accused.
- Making flawed rulings on evidence that stifle one side’s rights.
- Influencing the jury to reach a certain verdict.
- Sentences that are far too harsh for the offense.
Can you sue a judge for abuse of discretion?
Judges are typically immune from a lawsuit. You cannot sue judges for actions they took in their official capacity. For example, a judge who decides a case against you cannot be sued.
What is the standard of review for abuse of discretion?
Under the abuse of discretion standard, a reviewing court cannot reverse absent a definite and firm conviction that the district court committed a clear error of judgment in the conclusion it reached upon a weighing of relevant factors.