4. The Rule of Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Antisocial Behaviour ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Reforms ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Uk

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter explains the meaning and significance of the rule of law, briefly tracing the history of the rule of law and considering the main similarities and differences between various theories of the rule of law. It then assesses the impact of recent legal reforms on the operations of the rule of law in the UK. These reforms include the introduction of antisocial behaviour orders; the extension of detention without trial; and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, which reinforces the importance of the independence of the judiciary and puts measures in place to attempt to strengthen the separation of the courts from the other arms of the state. Finally, the chapter discusses judicial interpretation of the rule of law through a selection of cases that have examined the legality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety of the actions of the executive or public bodies, and whether their actions conform to the Human Rights Act 1998.

4. The Rule of Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 75-113
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Reforms ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter explains the meaning and significance of the rule of law, briefly tracing the history of the rule of law and considering the main similarities and differences between various theories of the rule of law. It then assesses the impact of recent legal reforms on the operations of the rule of law in the UK. These reforms include the extension of detention without trial; the developing body of anti-terror legislation; and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, which reinforces the importance of the independence of the judiciary and puts measures in place to attempt to strengthen the separation of the courts from the other arms of the state. Finally, the chapter discusses judicial interpretation of the rule of law through a selection of cases that have examined the legality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety of the actions of the executive or public bodies and whether their actions conform to the Human Rights Act 1998.

17. Irrationality and Proportionality

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Proportionality Test ◽  
Rights Issue

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter, which discusses the circumstances for judicial review of a public authority’s decision on the grounds that it is irrational, first explains the history of irrationality and ‘Wednesbury unreasonableness’, to provide some background to the topic and to chart its development. It then considers cases in which the courts have discussed different versions of the irrationality test, discusses the difference between irrationality and proportionality, and examines the development of proportionality and its use in judicial review cases. The chapter distinguishes between proportionality and merits review, and discusses the use of judicial deference by the courts. Proportionality, and not irrationality, is the test used to determine whether a public authority has acted unlawfully when its decision is challenged by judicial review under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998. The irrationality test is used in non Human Rights Act judicial review cases but the courts have also used the proportionality test in cases involving common law rights. The chapter concludes by considering the discussion in the case law and the scholarship as to whether the irrationality test should be replaced by the test of proportionality across both types of case: traditional judicial review cases and those involving a human rights issue.

14. The Role of the Courts, Judicial Review, and Human Rights

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Difference

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. The court is tasked with checking the legality of government action, which is mainly done through the process known as judicial review. Judicial review is a special form of court process that calls the executive to account for its exercise of power. This chapter discusses the history of judicial review; the grounds of review; the judicial review of delegated legislation; judicial review and the constitution; the difference between judicial review and appeal; the role of the courts and the Human Rights Act 1998; the judicial review procedure; and the extent to which judicial review can act as a check on executive power.

9. Parliamentary Supremacy and Human Rights

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Parliamentary Supremacy ◽  
The Uk

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter examines the legislative supremacy of the UK Parliament and its impact on human rights protection (and vice versa), discussing the history of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in a UK context and the ECHR’s legal standing. It considers the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) and its operation in the UK. The chapter addresses how the ECHR and the HRA 1998 affect parliamentary supremacy, and how the human rights context differs from the EU context as regards parliamentary supremacy. Finally, it analyses whether parliamentary supremacy provides adequate protection of human rights.

9. Parliamentary Supremacy and Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 259-294
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Parliamentary Supremacy ◽  
The Uk

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter examines the legislative supremacy of the UK Parliament and its impact on human rights protection (and vice versa), discussing the history of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in a UK context and the ECHR’s legal standing. It considers the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) and its operation in the UK. The chapter addresses how the ECHR and the HRA 1998 affect parliamentary supremacy and how the human rights context differs from the former EU context as regards parliamentary supremacy. Finally, it analyses whether parliamentary supremacy provides adequate protection of human rights.

17. Irrationality and Proportionality

2021 ◽  
pp. 565-600
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Proportionality Test ◽  
Rights Issue

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter, which discusses the circumstances for judicial review of a public authority’s decision on the grounds that it is irrational, first explains the history of irrationality and ‘Wednesbury unreasonableness’, to provide some background to the topic and to chart its development. It then considers cases in which the courts have discussed different versions of the irrationality test, discusses the difference between irrationality and proportionality, and examines the development of proportionality and its use in judicial review cases. The chapter distinguishes between proportionality and merits review and discusses the use of judicial deference by the courts. Proportionality, and not irrationality, is the test used to determine whether a public authority has acted unlawfully when its decision is challenged by judicial review under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998. The irrationality test is used in non-Human Rights Act judicial review cases, but the courts have also used the proportionality test in cases involving common law rights. The chapter concludes by considering the discussion in the case law and the scholarship as to whether the irrationality test should be replaced by the test of proportionality across both types of case: traditional judicial review cases and those involving a human rights issue.

14. The Role of the Courts, Judicial Review, and Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 433-478
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Difference

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. The court is tasked with checking the legality of government action, which is mainly done through the process known as judicial review. Judicial review is a special form of court process that calls the executive to account for its exercise of power. This chapter discusses the history of judicial review; the grounds of review; the judicial review of delegated legislation; judicial review and the constitution; the difference between judicial review and appeal; the role of the courts and the Human Rights Act 1998; the judicial review procedure; and the extent to which judicial review can act as a check on executive power.

19. Remedies

2021 ◽  
pp. 652-679
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
The Public ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
Primary Materials

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter discusses the remedies granted by the court. If a claimant successfully establishes that the public authority has acted in contravention of one of the grounds of review, then the court may grant a remedy. The purpose of a remedy is to tell the public authority what it has to do to comply with the judgment and to ensure, as far as possible, that it obeys the courts’ decision. There are two main types of remedies available in judicial review cases: ordinary remedies (injunction, declaration, and damages) and prerogative remedies (quashing order, prohibiting order, and mandatory order). The chapter also discusses situations that may cause the court to refuse a remedy and the courts’ powers to grant a remedy under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998), including a declaration of incompatibility in accordance with section 4 HRA 1998.

20. Human Rights IV: The Human Rights Act 1998

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
New Labour ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Core ◽  
Parliamentary Sovereignty ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Government

This chapter discusses the main provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and considers its implications for the understandings attached to the core constitutional principles of parliamentary sovereignty, the rule of law, and the separation of power. It argues that the Blair government’s rapid and determined efforts to convince Parliament to pass the HRA demonstrates that members of the first New Labour administration did not share the simplistic view of democracy embraced by the Conservative Party during the judicial supremacism episode. The 1998 Act may be criticised on the basis that it transfers a dangerous amount of political power from the government to the judges, but the sentiments evinced by many Conservative MPs on this issue had little to commend them from a constitutional perspective.

5. The Separation of Powers

2021 ◽  
pp. 114-144
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
History Of ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
Distribution Of Power ◽  
The Uk ◽  
And Function ◽  
The Impact

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. The separation of powers is a theory or a doctrine that describes how a state organizes the distribution of power and function between its different branches. It is often used as an umbrella term to denote the extent to which the three ‘powers’ in, or branches of, the state are fused or divided—that is, the legislative, the executive, and the judicial powers. This chapter begins by sketching the history of the separation of powers in the UK. It then discusses the purpose of the separation of powers; the similarities and differences between different theories of the separation of powers; the impact of recent constitutional reform on the operation of the separation of powers in the UK; how courts have interpreted the separation of powers; and the relevance of the separation of powers today, including in the context of the balance of power between the executive and Parliament as regards the UK’s decision to exit the European Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document