I. IntroductionFrom the outset, Hogan and Morgan make clear that the review of administrative discretion is a difficult area of ​​law to master, noting in particular that "formulating a precise test is particularly difficult because it was designed to s 'apply to such a wide range'. of the subject. » Indeed, the practice of reviewing administrative discretion involves many interdependent factors and has been the hallmark of the judicial system for many years. Even to this day, “the law relating to…discretionary power is evolving.” When entering the arena of judicial review, there is a fine line to walk in terms of balancing the need for judicial review and the maintenance of judicial review. appropriate level of judicial deference. In attempting to balance these competing interests and ultimately arrive at the fairest decision-making process, courts have progressed through a number of phases. In terms of unreasonableness, one monitoring official said, the case law emanates from the highly controversial Wednesbury case. This essay aims to trace the progression of the law in this area, from the unreasonableness of Wednesbury to the modern position set out in Meadows, and ultimately suggests that the adoption of a proportionality test, as chief of separate control, is beneficial. and would be welcome under Irish administrative law. This essay will analyze the position in which Meadows left this potentiality. It will be noted throughout that this is a difficult proposition, involving a large number of considerations, but simultaneously positing that a well-reasoned proportionality test would go a long way toward achieving an ideal balance for administrative review. II. The foundations ...... middle of paper ...... standard of justice, and it is unfortunate that they did not do so. In essence, the only positive point that emerges from the Meadows judgment is the recognition of proportionality. as an important part of the Irish administrative review. The elements of proportionality give the court broader power, which appears beneficial and has been endorsed by commentators and courts in many other countries. The goal here is to properly balance rights; Although Wednesbury was a blatant failure, proportionality is the right approach. Although proportionality has not made its full presence felt in the jurisdiction following Meadows, and this failure to comply may be seen as a misstep in Irish judicial reasoning on administrative discretion, the setting has certainly been prepared for further development in this area, by the acceptance of a semblance of proportionality in Irish law.