| ID | 114762 |
| Title Proper | Assessing the relationship between legislative and judicial supremacy in the UK |
| Other Title Information | parliament and the rule of law after Jackson |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | McCorkindale, Chris ; McKerrell, Nick |
| Publication | 2012. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | In this article, the authors will consider a very narrow yet spectacularly important aspect of the rule of law: its place in a constitution-the constitution of the United Kingdom-in which supremacy rests not with the constitution as a document to be interpreted by a constitutional court, but with the legislature itself. While traditionally the supremacy of the Crown in Parliament has meant that British courts have had no right to set aside even the most oppressive legislation, recent extra-judicial writings and obiter dicta in case law have been indicative of a shift in the judicial mood. In light of these developments, the paper will ask: Where does the relationship between the supremacy of the Crown in Parliament and the rule of law stand now? Where might that trajectory take us? And what might be done to reconcile the two? |
| `In' analytical Note | Round Table Vol. 101, No.421; Aug 2012: p.341-352 |
| Journal Source | Round Table Vol. 101, No.421; Aug 2012: p.341-352 |
| Key Words | Rule of Law ; Crown in Parliament ; Legislation ; Legislative Supremacy ; Courts ; Rights ; Justice ; Constitutional Principle ; Reasonable Disagreement ; J A G Griffith ; Lord Woolf ; Lord Steyn ; Sir John Laws ; Political Constitution ; Juristocracy |