relationships between the branches

• The Constitutional Reform Act (2005)


  led to the formation of the present Supreme Court in Parliament square, creating a difference between those who create laws and those who adjudicate them
• the supreme court can declare legislation unlawful if it breaches human rights or EU law
• what is the supreme court?


  the final court of appeals for wider public laws and laws of constitutional importance
• What does the supreme court do?


  undertake judicial review, which gives them the power to review and sometimes reverse actions by other branches of government that beach the law or the human rights act
• what does ‘ultra vires’ mean

  ‘beyond the powers’ - an action that is taken with out legal authority when it requires it
• membership of the court

  • 12 members
  • cases always heard by an odd number of justices to reach a majority
  • in larger cases more of the justices will take part: in 2016-17 11 justices worked on the ruling that Parliament should initiate the UK’s exist from the EU
• what is judicial neutrality?


  the absence of any form of partisanship or politically biased judgements
• what is judicial independence


  the principle that the actions and decisions of judges shouldnt be influenced by the pressure of the government
• how is judicial independence maintained

  • judges are chosen by an independent commission
  • judges can only be sacked if they break the law
  • pay decided by a separate pay review body
  • separate from parliament
  • can’t be threatened with removal
  • judges can only be sacked if they break the law
• Why should the judiciary be independent of the government?

  • if Judges aren Independent, there is a danger that the govt will exceed It's powers w/o legal justification, won could lead to tyranny
  • citizens must feel their rights are equally protected
  • Judges can + be unfivenced by short term changes in public opinion. reflected by politcans. They can take a long term view.
  • Judges should be selected on a neutral basis to prevent collusion between the judiciary & the govt
• to ensure judicial independence

  • judges must be free from political interference
  • law lords now in new building
  • appointments and pay are free from political interference
  • can speak openly in court
  • judges must be able to make decisions without fear of damaging their career
  • cannot be removed from office without good reason
• supreme court judges being neutral

  • 2005 Constitutional Reform Act removed most threats to their independence
  • Justices cannot be removed by ministers - security of tenure
  • cant be threatened with loss of income if politicians are unhappy with their decisions
  • appointments are largely independent of politics
  • no recent evidence of bias
• supreme court justices against neutrality

  • ministers can exert some influence over the final appointment of justices on the supreme court
  • neutrality tested over background
  • conservative politicians claim there are too many lawyers of a liberal disposition
  • Lord Reed and Lord Kerf hold life peerages and so will be able to sit in them House of Lords once they step down from the Supreme Court
• what is judicial review

  when an executive or legislative are subject to review by the judiciary
• why is judicial review necessary

  • helps preserve the rule of law
  • prevents the government abusing their powers
  • enforces the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR)
  • makes public bodies accountable
  • it ensures that no sections of the community are discriminated against
• aims of the EU

  • promoting peace in europe
  • economic integrations: economies develop together
  • single market economy
  • four freedoms: free movement of goods, services, people and capital
  • monetary union (euro)
  • central European bank to set interest rate for europe
  • expand eu with east European states
  • social policy: workers treated fairly across europe
  • political union: closer links with members of decision making
• arguments in favour of the EU

  • provided UK with duty-free access to the worlds second biggest economy
  • the UK economy benefited from EU immigration
  • 3+ million jobs relied on trade with the EU
  • entrepreneurs, students and retirees move anywhere
  • human and workers rights were strengthened
• arguments against the EU

  • EU challenged parliamentary sovereignty
  • EU dominated by the European Commission which is not directly elected
  • EU laws can sometimes be seen as unnecessary and may not serve the interests of all nations
  • The Common Agricultural Policy discriminates against developing states and free-market principles
  • UK contributed more than it got back
  • the free movement of people encourages xenophobic resentment, especially voters who gained little from EU immigration
• The constitutional impact of BREXIT on the UK

  • regain sovereignity
  • seoarate EU/UK laws
  • European Court of Justice no longer has UK jurisdiciton
• the political impact of BREXIT on the UK

  • in the conservative party it led to factions, leading to the end of two prime ministers
  • debate only over BREXIT
  • deep divisions in society
  • immigration
  • Northern Ireland and Scottish independence - devolution
• The supreme court is too powerful (❤️)
• Independence ❤️


  Guaranteed in law so free from political interference
• the supreme court and the ECHR ❤️


  • Enforce ECHR
  • Can declare proposed legislation incompatible with the ECHR - can interpret law and so affect the way it is implemented in the UK. Can hear appeals and overturn the decision (not binding)
• Citizens ❤️


  Can challenge govt actions that contradict ECHR or the rule of law
• Ultra vires ❤️


  Citizens may appeal against a decision by a public body on the grounds that it has exceeded its powers
• Judicial reviews ❤️


  Challenge a law by a public body
• Public enquiries by judges ❤️


  Can be very persuasive in forcing the government to take certain actions
• supreme court not too powerful 🎀

  • cannot activate own cases
  • cannot overrule the sovereignty of parliament
  • cannot compel govt to amend a law
  • judgements can be overturned by a parliamentary statute
  • courts cannot set aside parliamentary legislation