AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, Supreme Court

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Scottish Parliament ◽  
General Insurance

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, Supreme Court. This case addressed the extent to which Acts of the Scottish Parliament (ASPs) were reviewable by the courts, the special status of ASPs, and regularized the rules on standing as between English and Scots law. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, Supreme Court

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Scottish Parliament ◽  
General Insurance

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, Supreme Court. This case addressed the extent to which Acts of the Scottish Parliament (ASPs) were reviewable by the courts, the special status of ASPs, and regularized the rules on standing as between English and Scots law. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, Supreme Court

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Scottish Parliament ◽  
General Insurance

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, Supreme Court. This case addressed the extent to which Acts of the Scottish Parliament (ASP) were reviewable by the courts, the special status of ASPs, and regularized the rules on standing as between English and Scots law. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

The UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill—A Reference by the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland [2018] UKSC 64, Supreme Court

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Advocate General ◽  
Scottish Parliament ◽  
The Uk

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in The UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill—A Reference by the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland [2018] UKSC 64, Supreme Court. This case is concerned with the competencies of the Scottish Parliament, and the nature of devolution in the UK more generally. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, Supreme Court

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Webb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
General Insurance

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, Supreme Court. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 61, Supreme Court

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
Scottish Parliament

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 61, Supreme Court. This case concerned the devolved legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, the powers reserved to the Westminster Parliament under the Scotland Act 1998, and how these provisions should be interpreted. The statutory interpretation of constitutional legislation is also considered. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 61, Supreme Court

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Scottish Parliament ◽  
Uk Supreme Court

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 61, UK Supreme Court. This case concerned the devolved legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, the powers reserved to the Westminster Parliament under the Scotland Act 1998, and how these provisions should be interpreted. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 61, Supreme Court

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
Scottish Parliament ◽  
Uk Supreme Court

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 61, UK Supreme Court. This case concerned the devolved legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, the powers reserved to the Westminster Parliament under the Scotland Act 1998, and how these provisions should be interpreted. The statutory interpretation of constitutional legislation is also considered. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Public Law in the Supreme Court 2009–2010

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Cross ◽  
Christopher Knight
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Supreme Court

Constitutional Adjudication in Switzerland

2020 ◽  
pp. 779-840
Author(s):  
Giovanni Biaggini
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Decision Processes ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
The Public ◽  
Federal Laws ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
Constitutional Adjudication ◽  
Federal Supreme

This chapter considers how constitutional adjudication is conducted in Switzerland. It debunks the notion that the Swiss constitutional system is underdeveloped with regard to constitutional adjudication. The chapter contends that Switzerland has a thoroughly respectable system of constitutional adjudication, albeit with certain idiosyncratic flaws. In particular, this applies to cantonal state authority: the cantons are subject to comprehensive constitutional adjudication. This does not exclude the results of direct democratic decision processes. The Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgericht; Tribunal federal, Tribunale federale) has—and makes use of—the power to review cantonal laws and to revoke them if necessary. Constitutional case law in relation to the cantons is the basis on which the Federal Supreme Court developed an extraordinarily creative jurisprudence in the twentieth century; this jurisprudence has led, inter alia, to the recognition and use of several unwritten federal fundamental rights. In addition, the chapter argues that federal laws have ceased being completely immune against any kind of constitutional review. Finally, Switzerland played an important pioneering role in the development and testing of the public law appeal (Staatsrechtliche Beschwerde).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document