A Supreme Court for the United Kingdom?

Legal Studies ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 24 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 36-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda Hale

The Government's Consultation Paper does not have a question mark in its title. It does not purport to be a serious discussion of the role of a Supreme Court in a democracy. This is scarcely to be expected of such a document or its respondents, so I propose to respond in its own terms rather than on the loftier plane usually adopted by contributors to this journal. More unexpectedly, the Consultation Paper does not even put forward a serious set of options to consider. At the Law Commission, we always had (at least a metaphorical) question mark in our title because we almost always put forward two options which do not appear in this consultation: the ‘do nothing’ and the ‘let’s abolish it' options. Both have a lot to be said for them here.

Author(s):  
Findlay Stark

Abstract It will be argued that the United Kingdom Supreme Court (UKSC) should be bound by certain restrictions on its ability to develop the substantive criminal law: (i) the UKSC’s decision must plausibly be part of an (albeit edited) continuing legal narrative, not a fresh ‘striking out’ in a new direction; (ii) the UKSC should not make decisions that permit the conviction of the defendant when this development could not reasonably have been predicted, ex ante; (iii) the UKSC should take account of the ‘mood music’ (if any) of Parliament, the government and the Law Commission when deciding whether to develop the criminal law in a particular manner; and (iv) the UKSC should bear in mind the practical and epistemic limitations inherent in criminal proceedings (even on appeal). Recent judgments of the UKSC display insufficient regard for these considerations. Attention will be given, specifically, to Jogee (on complicity) and Ivey (on dishonesty).


2021 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 588-595
Author(s):  
Elaine O’Callaghan

The Supreme Court in the United Kingdom has held that it is not contrary to public policy to award damages in tort to fund a commercial surrogacy in another jurisdiction where this is lawful. This significant decision, in the case of Whittington Hospital NHS Trust v XX [2020] UKSC 14, will potentially have an impact on the regulation and reform of surrogacy law in the United Kingdom, Ireland and internationally. The judgment delivered by Lady Hale draws attention to multiple inconsistencies in the law, and it highlights, in particular, the need for effective regulation of domestic surrogacy. Legislators face an important and imminent challenge to reconcile the reality of commercial surrogacy with a deficient legal framework. This article seeks to highlight some of the important issues which this case has raised when considering regulation and reform of surrogacy law.


2019 ◽  
pp. 172-194
Author(s):  
Adrian Briggs

This chapter examines of the role of the lex fori in English private international law before proceeding to examine the rules of the conflict of laws applicable in an English court. Issues for which the rules of the conflict of laws select the lex fori as the law to be applied include grounds for the dissolution (as distinct from nullity) of marriage, even if the marriage has little or nothing to do with the United Kingdom; or settlement of the distribution of assets in an insolvency even though there may be significant overseas elements. Where the rules of the conflict of laws select a foreign law, its application, even though it is proved to the satisfaction of the court, may be disrupted or derailed by a provision of the lex fori instead. The remainder of the chapter covers procedural issues; penal, revenue, and public laws; and public policy.


2005 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 863-880
Author(s):  
Sir Gordon Slynn

This article outlines the difficulties which were felt to exist in the prerogative orders of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition in the United Kingdom, despite important developments which had taken place in their use. It describes in detail the recommendations of the Law Commission and the changes introduced both by Rules of Court and legislation. The former procedures are replaced by an application for judicial review, though the basis upon which relief is granted remains substantially the same. Recent cases show the way in which the new procedure has developed. Distinctions are drawn between the test to be applied on the application for leave and on the final hearing, and between the proceeding by way of judicial review to challenge the acts of public authorities and actions where purely private rights are claimed. This article shows the way in which the possibility of exceptions to this latter distinction has been established and suggests that the ambit of the new procedure is still in course of development.


2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
The Hon J Edelman

<p><em>This year is the 200</em><em>th </em><em>anniversary of one of the leading decisions concerning the law of tracing in equity. Celebrations have not been widely held. Two centuries after this decision, the rules of tracing in equity remain very difficult to understand and very difficult to justify. But they are of immense practical importance including to the law of trusts, claims based on fraud, and claims against remote recipients of property. This year, the United Kingdom Supreme Court has also returned to the topic in the context of a claim based on non-contractual subrogation. This article explains some of the persistent problems in the law of tracing and shows how to understand the operation of equitable tracing rules.</em></p>


1969 ◽  
pp. 369
Author(s):  
Peter W. Hogg ◽  
W.R. Lederman

In the following commentaries, Peter W. Hogg and W. R. Lederman discuss different aspects of Geoffrey Marshall's presentation on amendment and patriation. Professor Hogg's topic is more specifically the role of the United Kingdom Parliament, while Pro fessor Lederman comments upon the positions of the Supreme Court of Canada and the British Government and Parliament.


Author(s):  
Richard Cornes

El presente artículo analiza la función del liderazgo de las principales magistraturas judiciales del Reino Unido. Como el autor resalta, dicho liderazgo se proyecta sobre la gestión interna del tribunal, la influencia en la jurisprudencia del órgano y el papel que adoptan ciertas instancias en tanto que altos representantes del poder judicial.This articles analyses the leadership function of the main lead judges of the United Kingdom. As the author points out, this leadership reveals itself within the management of the Court itself, the influence in the case-law and in the role of some judges as statepersons.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document