‘Brexiteers and their media allies have declared war on our judiciary. On behalf of the people, the supreme court must push back.’
The Guardian, 5th December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘All 11 of the UK’s most senior judges will take their seats on the supreme court bench on Monday to decide whether parliament or the government has the authority to trigger Brexit.’
The Guardian, 5th December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Michael Zander QC reviews the written cases of the government & the lead claimants in next week’s Supreme Court hearing.’
New Law Journal, 1st December 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Prerogative is the enemy of the people. This has been settled as matter of law for a very long time. The constitutional settlement of 1688 made a decision for responsible and representative government. We have had no constitutional moment of similar magnitude since. All constitutional changes – some very significant – have taken place within that foundational structure. The Bill of Rights treats prerogative as the antithesis of good government. Its primary target is a range of extra-legal powers hitherto asserted by the King, pride of place being given to the power to dispense with laws and the power to suspend Acts of Parliament.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 2nd December 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The article 50 supreme court hearings won’t solve our systemic crisis. We need a new way to connect people and state.’
The Guardian, 2nd December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The lord chancellor, Liz Truss, has broken her silence on the high court’s Brexit ruling, saying the independence of the judiciary was the “foundation upon which our rule of law is built”.’
The Guardian, 5th November 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The most surprising thing about the decision in R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union is that so many people have found the decision surprising. The reasoning in the case – essentially, that the executive is unable to use the prerogative to remove statutory rights – rests on a clear line of case-law going back four hundred years, and turns on a foundational principle of constitutional law. It is unremarkable that three of the country’s leading judges – the Master of the Rolls, the Lord Chief Justice, and the leading public law judge in the Court of Appeal – were able to produce a unanimous, clear, judgment restating this orthodoxy. The only remarkable thing about the judgment is how such quality was produced under such extraordinary time and political pressure.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 7th November 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Does triggering Art 50 require a prior Act of Parliament, asks Michael Zander QC.’
New Law Journal, 12th October 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Thursday 13 October 2016 marked the beginning of the hearing over the constitutional question of whether Article 50 may be triggered by the Government without further statutory authorisation. This post provides a report of the day’s proceedings. The two further days are scheduled for Monday and Tuesday next week.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 14th October 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The need for Parliament to give its approval before the Brexit process starts is of huge “constitutional importance”, the High Court has heard.’
BBC News, 13th October 2016
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The imminent litigation concerning the government’s response to the Brexit vote is much anticipated. The skeleton arguments have now been filed. The High Court has just resisted an application for partial redaction of the arguments, so they are open for public perusal.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 29th September 2016
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The government is shutting down public debate by refusing to allow legal opponents to reveal the official justification for using royal prerogative powers, rather than seeking parliament’s approval, to trigger Brexit, according to documents lodged in the high court.’
The Guardian, 23rd September 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Considerable public interest has recently been focused on the ‘trigger’ mechanism for exit from the EU which is set out in Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Expert opinion has divided between those who believe that the power to trigger Article 50 rests with the Executive using the legal authority of the royal prerogative from the Crown with no further parliamentary involvement necessary and those who argue that fresh legislation is required to confer statutory authorisation on the Executive to do something which could render nugatory rights under the European Communities Act 1972 (‘ECA’). An ingenious third way involving section 2(2) of the ECA has also been suggested.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 8th July 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 is a contentious and oft criticised piece of legislation, although it does have its supporters. The government and the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee have argued it has created a stable environment for longer-term government planning.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 19th November 2014
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org/blog
“There was nothing unlawful in the Foreign Secretary’s decision to allow a UK resident to be added to the UN’s Consolidated List of members of Al-Quaida and its associates.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 1st November 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Prerogative orders in council which prevented the unrestricted return of Chagos Islanders to their homeland were not unlawful.”
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Regina (Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2)
House of Lords
“Prerogative orders made by the Queen in Council which prevented the unrestricted return of Chagos Islanders to their homeland were not unlawful.”
The Times, 23rd October 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
A, K, M, Q and G v HM Treasury
Queen’s Bench Division
“Orders in Council, made purportedly to give effect to United Nations resolutions freezing the assets of terrorist organisations and their adherents, were to be quashed since, among other faults, they had been improperly made outside the parliamentary process and were bad as creating criminal law of insufficient certainty.”
The Times, 5th May 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
“Step by step, the arguments of the 17th century over parliamentary control of prerogative powers are at last being resolved. The draft Constitutional Renewal Bill is a further big step, by no means the final one, into making the executive more accountable.”
The Times, 26th March 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal
“Proposals to replace two-tier local government in some parts of the country with unitary authorities, made before the necessary statutory powers were in place, were lawful as long as genuine reconsideration had been given to them after the commencement of the relevant Act.”
The Times, 12th March 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
© Inner Temple Library 2024