Having considered, in my first two posts in this series, the general scope and underlying agenda of the Government’s Review of judicial review and the possibility of codifying the grounds of review, I turn now to the matter of justiciability. If the Review’s terms of reference are generally sparse, what they have to say about… Continue reading The Judicial Review Review III: Limiting judicial review by ‘clarifying’ non-justiciability — or putting lipstick on the proverbial pig
In my first post on the Review of judicial review, I noted, among other things, the potentially far-reaching nature of the recommendations that might emerge, bearing in mind the Review’s notably broad terms of reference. As I also noted in my first post, the underlying agenda is plainly the limitation of the courts’ powers and… Continue reading The Judicial Review Review II: Codifying Judicial Review — Clarification or Evisceration?
The UK Government has announced a review of judicial review — the Independent Review of Administrative Law — with notably broad terms of reference. This post is the first in a series that will consider some of the potential changes to judicial review that the Government appears to be contemplating. Subsequent posts, which will be… Continue reading The Judicial Review Review I: The Reform Agenda and its Potential Scope
I recently completed work on an article for a special issue of the Japanese legal journal Horitsu Jiho. The theme of the special issue is the impact of the forces of globalisation and nationalism on constitutional law and the study of it. In my contribution, I consider the potential implications of the United Kingdom's departure… Continue reading The United Kingdom’s constitution and Brexit: A ‘constitutional moment’?
I recently completed a paper, to be published in a forthcoming edited collection, on 'The Fundamentality of Rights at Common Law'. The concern of the paper is with the senses in, and the extent to, which common law constitutional rights can properly be regarded as fundamental. In the context of the United Kingdom’s constitution, that… Continue reading The Fundamentality of Rights at Common Law
This short piece, which forms part of my 1,000 words series of posts, aims to set out in an accessible way the key points of the Supreme Court's judgment in the Cherry/Miller (No 2) case. For a more detailed and technical analysis of the judgment, see this post. In its historic judgment in Cherry/Miller (No… Continue reading 1,000 words / The Supreme Court’s Judgment in Cherry/Miller (No 2)
The following is my detailed, initial analysis of the Supreme Court's judgment in the Cherry/Miller (No 2) case. For a shorter explanation of the case, see this 1,000 words post. Reactions to the unanimous Supreme Court judgment in Cherry/Miller (No 2)  UKSC 41 have been as strong as they have been diverse. On one… Continue reading A new approach to constitutional adjudication? Miller II in the Supreme Court
A good deal has been said in recent days about whether the Government’s advice to the Queen concerning the prorogation of Parliament raises a legal question on which courts can properly adjudicate. As is well-known, English and Scottish courts have so far differed sharply on this point: in the Cherry case, the Inner House of… Continue reading Prorogation and justiciability: Some thoughts ahead of the Miller II case in the Supreme Court
https://youtu.be/3G00xv8HfWY I have written before about the Supreme Court’s judgment, given in December 2018, in the ‘Scottish Continuity Bill case’  UKSC 64. The Continuity Bill was adopted by the Scottish Parliament against the background of serious disagreement between the Scottish and UK Governments concerning the UK Parliament’s European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (on which see this post). That disagreement… Continue reading Video: Cambridge Centre for Public Law event on the Scottish Continuity Bill case