Essay
Uk Essay Plans With Complete Solutions Latest Update
- Course
- Institution
Uk Essay Plans With Complete Solutions Latest Update
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Schoolflix
Reviews received
Content preview
Uk Essay Plans With Complete Solutions LatestUpdate
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO
POWERFUL
Intro YES: rise in applications for judicial review has held up the work of
democratically elected representatives. Furthermore, the judiciary's role to allow
ECJ, the ECHR to challenge parliamentary sovereignty and recent constitutional
reforms all add weight to why they are too powerful. However judicial review
protects the rule of law, essential in a liberal democracy. The uk judiciary lacks
power vs. a judiciary with a codified constitutions, they also demonstrate judicial
restraint
PARA 1: YES - judicial review far too much power over public policy and
influence over elected officials
ultra vires - 2017 - SC ruled that parliament must vote on whether Article 50
should begin - May could not begin talks
Sajid Javid - 'clear attempt to frustrate the will of the British public who wanted to
leave'
Boris Johnson and Lord chancellor Robert Buckland QC have set up a panel of
experts tasked with examining the need "for potential reforms to judicial review".
unelected judges vs. elected politicians
R(Miller) v the Prime Minister 2019 limited royal prerogative power to prorogue
Parliament of the UK - restated parliamentary sovereignty
,Oct 2013 - Court of Appeal ruled that Jeremy Hunt did not have the power to
implement cuts at Lewisham Hospital
Increased 3x fold - judicial reviews were 4000 in 2000 vs. 15,000 in 2013
PARA 2: YES - judicial independence the creation of the Supreme Court has
made conflict more likely and has strengthened the autonomy of the court.
Created in 2009 - establishing the seperation of powers, Judicial Appointments
Commission and limited role of Lord Chancellors
Likely to be more active attacking members of parliament - Boris Johnsons
suspension of parliament for political reasons in Sept 2019
A lot of reform to neutralise the court... diff to War Lords - defend their actions -
Law Reed 'judges aren't staging a power grab' after the SC landmark Brexit defeats
YES - the HRA holds too much power HRA makes it unlawful for any public body
to act in an unconventional way against the EC in on human rights - Judges can
undermine rulings
Gilian vs. Quentin case (2010) at EC found unwarranted police search - are they
stepping into public policy? Hindering crime fighting?
HJ (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2010) - homosexuality -
HRA prevents immigrants from being deported to places of discrimination
Where laws were ambiguous, court now able to interpret them, and force
parliament to act through declaration of incompatibility - Ruling on the merits of
law, rather than the application of it
Because ECHR vaguely written, liberal judges have taken an increasingly broad
view of rights that are protected e.g. become more 'activist'. e.g. creating right to
, privacy where none existed in UK law - allowing super-injunctions. This has
undermined Parliament's attempts to set minimum sentences for certain crimes.
PARA 4: NO - judicial review is undermined by sovereignty SC exists!!! that's why
JR has increased, no longer in parliament so therefore has more independence
The courts are assuring that the government isn't too powerful
Unlawful laws can be changed and altered as parliament is sovereign
2010 freezing of assets of suspected terrorists - SC ruled that it obstructed the
rules parliament had given to government - went against HRA, put it through
parliament - only bc it was a UN requirement
When a judge rules minister has acted ultra vires, they are only upholding the will
of Parliament, which set out the law in the first place. Ensuring public officials only
act within the powers that parliament has granted.
'Black Spider' memos (2015) Journalist Rob Evans wished to see letters and memos
(nicknamed 'Black Spider' because of the distinctive handwriting) sent by Prince
Charles to government ministers. The government did not want to release the
letters, arguing the contents were private and sensitive.
NO - lack of constitution - upholding parliamentary soverignty unlike US
Supreme Court who can strike down Congress because of the Constitution
We don't have a codified document - Shelby vs. Holder - voting rights Act - shows
the US power
Abortion - 'heartbeat bill'
· Constitution still predominantly consists of statute law, passed by elected
representatives in Parliament.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Schoolflix. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $11.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
75619 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now