5481313
Beschreibung
Karteikarten von Dina Storz, aktualisiert more than 1 year ago
|
Erstellt von Dina Storz
vor mehr als 8 Jahre
|
|
| Frage | Antworten |
| Constitutional statutes | Thoburn v Sunderland City Council 2002: laws LJ proposed that courts should recognise the distinction between "ordinary" and "constitutional" statutes and that the doctrine of implied repeal be limited to the former only. Comment by Geoffrey Marshall 2002 A. Perry and F. Ahmed, "our constitutional statutes quasi-entrenched", UK constitutional law blog (25 November 2013) on H v Lord Advocate 2012 UKSC |
| Thoburn v Sunderland City Council 2002 quote | "we should recognise a hierarchy of acts of Parliament: as it were "ordinary" statutes and "constitutional" statutes. The two categories must be distinguished on a principled basis. In my opinion a constitutional statue is one which (a) conditions the legal relationship between citizen and state and some general, overarching manner, or (B) enlarges or diminishes the scope of what we would now regard as fundamental constitutional rights. (A) and (B) are of necessity closely related: it is difficult to think of an instance of (a) that is not also an instance of (B). The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are Magna Carta 1297 the Bill of Rights 1689 The Union with Scotland act 1706 the reform acts which distributed and enlarge the franchise (representation of the people Acts 1832, 1867 and 1884), the human rights act 1998, the Scotland act 1998 and the government of Wales act 1998. The 1972 act clearly belongs in this family. It incorporated the whole corpus of substantive community rights and obligations, |
| Thoburn v Sunderland City Council 2002 quote continued | "… And gave overriding domestic affected the judicial and administrative machinery of community law. It may be there has never been a statue having such profound effects on so many dimensions of our daily lives. The 1972 act is, by force of the common law, a constitutional statue." |
| A. Perry and F. Ahmed, "our constitutional statutes quasi-entrenched", UK constitutional law blog (25 November 2013) on H v Lord Advocate 2012 UKSC Quote | "Overall, H v Lord Advocate 2012 UKSC suggests that courts in the future will take a new approach to the Scotland act. They will not treat that act as exempt from express repeal – as "entrenched" in the full sense of the term – but they were treated as exempt from implied repeal – as 'quasi-entrenched'. they are likely to treat other constitutional statutes as quasi-entrenched, too" |
Möchten Sie mit GoConqr kostenlos Ihre eigenen Karteikarten erstellen? Mehr erfahren.