Supreme Court

Question 1

When was the SC established and when did it begin work?

Answer 1

Established by the Constitutional Reform Act of 2005 but didn’t begin work until October 2009

Question 2

Who created the SC?

Answer 2

Tony Blair’s Labour government - designed to end fusion of powers at the highest level of the UK judiciary and modern use by moving towards a separation of powers.

Question 3

Judges are appointed by……..

Answer 3

An Independent Judicial Appointments Commission

Question 4

How can the Supreme Court be seen as challenging parliamentary sovereignty

Answer 4

The law lords in the HoL were no longer the UK’s final court of appeal. Further, the increased independence of the court was designed to make it more effective in holding the government and parliament to account.

On the other hand, though it is politically very unlikely, the Supreme Court could in theory and legally still be abolished/ reformed with a simple act of parliament.

Question 5

What cases does the SC hear?

Answer 5

• the only UK-wide court and is the final court of appeal for rulings made by lower courts, such as the High Court.

out also hears cases of public and constitutional importance, including:
- judging whether the government has acted ‘ultra vires’, as was in the case in the 2019 Prorogation of Parliament Case.
- judging whether devolved bodies are acting within their powers.
- judging whether acts of parliament contravene the Human Rights Act.

Question 6

The Supreme Court consists of how many members

Answer 6

12 - though cases are always heard by an odd number of justices so that a majority verdict can be reached.

Question 7

Judges have to retire from the court once they reach……. Years old

Answer 7

70 at which point they enter the HoL

Question 8

How the Supreme Court is unrepresentative

Answer 8

The Times used the phrase ‘pale, male and stale’ in 2011

11/12 are male

12/12 are white

11/12 have studied at oxbridge and the majority went to private schools

12/12 are over 60

Question 9

How are SC justices chosen

Answer 9

Since the Constitutional Reform Act, new Supreme Court justices are nominated by an independent 5-member Selection Commission and a member of each of the equivalent bodies for Scotland and NI.

The Lord Chancellor then either confirms or rejects the nominated judge. The Lord Chancellor can only reject a nomination 3 times

The appointment is then confirmed by the monarch.

Question 10

What is Judicial Neutrality

Answer 10

• the idea that judged will exercise their functions without being influenced by their own personal bias or political opinions.

Question 11

How is judicial neutrality safeguarded in the Supreme Court

Answer 11

• judges have traditionally remained largely anonymous
• judges have to base each decision in law and provide a full explanation of how they reached it.
• Supreme Court decisions are published in full for people to read and scrutinise, whilst cases are televised on YouTube.
• Supreme Court judges; elevation to the bench is based on their past performance, experience and the expectation they will set aside their personal views.
• conflicts of interests are avoided by preventing Supreme Court judges from sitting on cases that involve family, friends and other they know personally.

Question 12

How the Supreme Court’s Judicial Neutrality has been questioned in relation to composition

Answer 12

• narrow compositions of the court in terms of gender, age, education, class and race. Leads to limited perspective.

Question 13

What is judicial independence

Answer 13

The idea that judges must be free from political interference, particularly from the government. Especially important in ‘ultra vires’ court cases involving the state, as the public must be confident they are receiving impartial justice under the rule of law, while judges must be confident that their judgements wont influence their job prospects.

Question 14

How Judicial Independence is safeguarded in the SC:

Security of tenure

Answer 14

• judges cant be removed from office unless they break the law or are impeached by a vote in both Houses of Parliament.
• the only limit on their service is an official retirement age if 70, which is known as a security of tenure.
• like MPs in parliament, judges are also immune from legal action arising from any comments they make on cases in court.

Question 15

How Judicial Independence is safeguarded in the SC:

Pay

Answer 15

• judges’ salaries are paid automatically from an independent budget known as the consolidation funds, which cant be manipulated by the government.
• they are also paid well so that there is less incentive for them to be influenced by financial pressure. (£226,193)

Question 16

How Judicial Independence is safeguarded in the SC:

Appointment

Answer 16

• Since the Constitutional Reform Act, new Supreme Court justices are nominated by an independent 5-member Selection Commission and a member of each of the equivalent bodies for Scotland and NI.
• especially in comparison to the previous system, under which the Lord Chancellor would appoint judges, this system is therefore free from government influence, very transparent and depoliticised.

Question 17

How Judicial Independence is safeguarded in the SC:

Physical separation from parliament

Answer 17

The Supreme Court being separate has removed any possible doubt that the law lords were subject to government pressure.

Question 18

How Judicial Independence is safeguarded in the SC:

Sub judicial rules

Answer 18

• sub judicial rules prevent members of parliament, government ministers and the media from publicly speaking about impending or ongoing legal processings.

This is intended to prevent the media and politicians from influencing the outcome of court cases.

Question 19

What role does the Supreme Court play in relation to the human rights act?

Answer 19

The Supreme Court plays an important role in ensuring that all legislation passed by parliament is compliant with the Human Rights Act.

Though the ECHR and HRA aren’t legally superior to statute laws, the Supreme Court can declare acts of Parliament incompatible with the Human Rights Act and urge Parliament to change them.

Question 20

Arguments that the SC has limited influence over the Executive and Parliament in relation to the Human Rights Act

Answer 20

• whilst the Supreme Court can issue a DECLARATION OF INCOMPATIBILITY in relation to the HRA, they have no legal powers to compel parliament and the government to change the offending Act of Parliament due to Parliament being sovereign.
• the HRA could easily be repealed/changed by a simple Act of Parliament.

Question 21

Arguments that the Supreme Court has significant influence over the Executive and Parliament in relation to the HRA

Answer 21

• whilst the SC cant legally compel Parliament to make any changes to laws, Parliament usually acts to address any declarations of incompatibility raised by the courts and parliament also has a JOINT COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS to scrutinise bills and ensure they are compatible therefore demonstrating the ‘persuasive influence’ of the HRA.

Question 22

How the Supreme Court’s Judicial Review Powers allow it to declare the actions of government ‘Ultra Vires’

Answer 22

• The Supreme Court has the power to ensure that the government hasn’t acted beyond the authority given to them by the law in ‘ultra Vires’ cases.
• this can be by stretching secondary legislation too far, or by doing something that breaks primary legislation.
• if the government is judged to have acted ‘ultra Vires’, the Supreme Court can sanction the government or force them to reverse their action.
• the Supreme Court can strike down secondary legislation
• can also strike down laws passed by devolved bodies.

Question 23

How the Supreme Court used to have greater powers when the UK was in the EU

Answer 23

When the UK was a member of the European Union, the Supreme Court had greater powers over Parliament and the Government because it could strike down laws passed by Parliament or the actions of government when either branch had breached EU law, which was higher law.

Question 24

What arguments are there that the SC has too much political power?

Answer 24

• power of the SC to interpret the law and judge whether individuals and public bodies, including the government, have broken it can be seen as a quasi-legislative function that grants them a lot of power.
• on the other hand, it can be argued that this is unavoidable as long as they are asked to carry out the law and the court is a politically neutral and independent body which plays a key role in upholding democracy and the rule of law in the UK.

Question 25

What arguments are there that the SC has become increasingly politicised?

Answer 25

• the power of the SC to issue declarations of incompatibility with the Human Rights Act draws into the political fray, asking the court to judge the merits of legislation passed by parliament rather than simply ensuring this legislation is effectively implemented.
• recent high profile SC cases in Brexit and Scottish Independence have made the court more high profile and politicised, with judges no longer as anonymous as they used to be and politicians and the media commenting on decisions of the court.
• some have argued that the decisions in the Article 50 and Prorogation cases were examples of the SC interfering too much in politics and limiting the actions of a democratically elected government.

Question 26

What arguments are there that the Supreme Court hasn’t become increasingly politicised?

Answer 26

• since the Constitutional Reform Act, the appointments process is a lot more transparent and less open to political interference.
• since the UK has left the EU, the SC now has no power to strike down laws passed by parliament.
• It can be argued that the conflict between the SC and the government is not due to the court trying to extend its political role and wade into politics, but because the government has increasingly sought to act ‘ultra Vires’