In an administrative lawsuit, when may the court bring another administrative agency into the case, and who can put that question to the court?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In practice material of this kind, we read the petition to see which administrative agency is named as defendant, the ruling the court made on joining another agency, and any paper by which a party or the agency in question asked to join, together with the notes of the opinions heard before that ruling.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading treats joining as a discretionary act of the court that stays open only where the court recognises that another administrative agency must take part in the case, and it may act either on an application by a party or by that agency itself, or on its own motion, by a ruling; before making that ruling the court must hear the views of the parties and of the agency in question.
Another reading stresses that the provision governs a further administrative agency being brought into an existing lawsuit, so the plaintiff's choice of the original defendant is untouched, and once joined the agency is treated as the Civil Procedure Act treats an auxiliary party, a consequence this provision states only by applying that treatment rather than spelling it out.
Your judgment
When the court joins an agency of its own motion, what in the file would show that the agency's participation was necessary rather than merely convenient?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change who may apply for joinder or how far the Civil Procedure Act rules on an auxiliary party are applied, or if a court decision explains what finding of necessity supports joinder.