New Parliamentary Sovereignty Flashcards Preview

GDL > New Parliamentary Sovereignty > Flashcards

Flashcards in New Parliamentary Sovereignty Deck (14)
Loading flashcards...
1

What are Dicey's three parts to the definition of Parliamentary Sovereignty? Which book are they from?

 

1. Parliament can make or unmake whatever law it wishes

2. No body can set aside the legislation of Parliament

3. No Parliament can bind it's successors  

2

What is the doctrine of implied and express repeal?

The doctrine of implied repeal dictates that if a latter statute is incompatible with an earlier statute, the court will apply the latter statute (Ellen Street Estates)

Express repeal is when Parliament expressly repeals a bill

3

What is one exception to the doctrine of implied repeal?

Thoburn v Sunderland CC- Implied repeal may not be possible in cases in which "constitutional statutes" are concerned.

4

What are four examples of Parliament being able to "make or unmake whatever law it likes"

1. Madzimabuto v Lardner-Burke- Convention

2. Cheney v Conn- International treaties

3. Burmah Oil- Restrospectivity

4. Crown Proceedings Act- Royal Preorgative

5

Explain the manner and form argument

According to some Parliament may be able to dictate the manner and form of how future Parliament's pass legislation. Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949. A-G of NSW v Trethowan

6

Obiter comments suggest that the United Kingdom may be bound in a limited way by the Acts of Union. Lord Bingham says if this is true, it isn’t significant.  Which case?

MacCormick v Lord Advocate
 

7

Ellen Street Estates

If there is a conflict between an earlier and a latter statute, the court will apply the latter statute.

8

Thoburn v Sunderland CC

The doctrine of implied repeal is not effective in constitutional statutes. 

9

Pickin v BR Engineering

The enrolled act rule was reaffirmed. Even where Parliament had been misled it was found that if the bill was on the Parliamentary roll, it was enacted.

10

Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza

The court used their power to interpret legislation under s3 of the HRA liberally and read more than the literal meaning of a housing statute to give the claimant his rights under article 8

11

The Belmarsh Case

The court made a declaration of incompatibility under s4 of the HRA to say that indefinite detention of foreign nationals was not legal under ECHR. The law was then changed.

12

Litster v Forth Dry Dock

The House of Lords interpreted UK TUPE regulations contrary to their literal meanings to give effect to an EU directive. 

13

Factortame

The House of Lords applied s2(4) of the ECA1972 to grant an interim injunction to Factortame shipping from the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, effectively suspending an Act of Parliament.

14

What are the two cases that deal with implied and express repeal?

Ellen Street Estates
If there is a conflict between an earlier and a latter statute, the court will apply the latter statute.

Thoburn v Sunderland CC
The doctrine of implied repeal is not effective in constitutional statutes.