In this Audio recording from our 2015 annual conference , Mike talks about the following: • Implications of repeal of the HRA and statutorily restricted rights • The strength and potential of the common law and international human rights obligations • A rebalanced Constitution through the principle of legality and the rule of law
Sir Stephen Sedley and Cambridge University Press (CUP) have allowed us to publish the introduction to Lions under the Throne , Essays on the History of English Public Law. The first part of this chapter sketches the early growth of English public law. The second part tries to describe what it was like to be involved in the modern take-off of public law as it roused itself from its long sleep.
This paper presentation will cover which acts of Government have been challenged , changes to Government policy and its stance during and after litigation. It will also look at the feasibility studies , the current Supreme Court case and what the new decision means.
The Government sometimes adds a provision to a Bill which enables the Government to repeal or amend it after it has become an Act of Parliament. The provision enables the amendment of primary legislation using delegated (or secondary) legislation. Such provisions are known as ‘Henry VIII clauses’. To students of ‘1066 and All That’ Henry VIII was a dangerous tyrant and ‘a bad thing’. In 1539 he persuaded a supine parliament to pass the Statute of Proclamations giving the king’s decisions the same force as acts of the legislature; hence the name Henry VIII clause.
There are no enforceable economic , social or cultural rights in the UK. Although the UK has ratified ICESCR it has not been incorporated into domestic law and the ECHR is of course primarily concerned with civil and political rights. Therefore it is generally uncontroversial that there are no rights to state benefits or social security in the UK. The attempts that have been made to infer such rights under ECHR have largely failed.
Henry VIII clauses by which Acts of Parliament may be changed by delegated legislation are a constitutional anomaly. They are derived from a time when the Crown exercised absolute power. In the modern age they have the potential to subvert the sovereignty of parliament and substitute executive tyranny.
The result of a collaborative project with The Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law and The Public Law Project , this work aims to provide an introduction to the latest changes to judicial review practice and procedure. Setting the latest changes from Parliament in their constitutional context , we hope that our work will help inform the Act’s interpretation and its early application.
This paper surveys the significant decisions and developments in discrimination cases this year that are likely to be of most relevance for public law claims.
There have been lots of exciting things going on in the courts recently regarding the constitution and fundamental rights. Michael Fordham QC has delivered an overview of these changes in his earlier talk. This seminar aims to fill in the detail. It outlines the recent changes and argues that there is as yet no certainty that a repeal of the HRA will make no difference. It gives suggestions for what may be done now to try to enhance the protection of fundamental rights by the common law and to safeguard your cases from the potential repeal of the Human Rights Act.
The number and diversity of JR cases is now such that a review of the year can only hope to cover a small sample of the Administrative Court’s workload. The selection of cases below (from September 2014 to July 2015) necessarily reflects our personal choice , and no doubt there are many others that could have been included. We have each picked four cases. They are summarised below in chronological order.
The process through which legal redress may be obtained against public authorities is often criticised as being politicised , of little value to claimants , and burdensome on public bodies. Based on the largest empirical study of judicial review outcomes to date , Varda Bondy , Lucinda Platt and Maurice Sunkin explain how the process can actually benefit claimants , and improve policy and practice.
This is the powerpoint (PDF) which accompanied a presentation on judicial review and mediation. The presentation covered:
– when to mediate , pre or post permission?
– what added value can mediation offer to complement litigation?
– how to propose mediation persuasively or deal with a refusal to mediate