1. Law
2. History and Philosophy of Law
3. 26027

This content was COPIED from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Another important difference between the two acts is the wording of the allocation of power. The PHA allows for considerable discretion given to those who use the act by using the word "may" numerous times. This implies the act entitles the user the freedom to make decisions they consider appropriate. In contrast to the EPEA, the use of the word "shall" implies those who use this act are limited in their decision making process. These two words exemplify which party has the power of interpretation in each act. The PHA bestows the power and judgement to those who utilize the act while the EPEA does not lend this same judgement to those who use it [The word "shall" in the EPEA -I need to explain why I think it doesn't allow people judgement. Why is it different than the word "may"? I need a sentence or two explaining the difference.]

In contrast, the PHA's appeal board - referred to as the Public Health Appeal Board (PHAB) - does follow natural justice and appears to be more fair. If an individual affected by an order does not believe the EHO/PHI case is strong, they can appeal the case to the PHAB, and can rest assured that those working under the PHA stay within their jurisdiction. [ sounds like an advertisement. They can "rest assured". I need to say that in a less biased way]