2. Sources of Constitutional Law and Constitutional Conventions

Sources of Constitutional Law
  • The sources of constitutional law in the UK are:
    • the common law;
    • Acts of Parliament;
    • European Union law;
    • the jurisprudence of the ECHR which must be taken into account by the UK courts in cases involving ECHR and Fundamental Freedoms;
    • the law and custom of Parliament.
The Common Law
  • The binding rules formulated and applied by judges in decided cases in the senior courts have made a vital contribution to the development of constitutional law.

Acts of Parliament
  • Constitutional statutes as those which condition the legal relationship between the citizen and state in some general, overarching manner; or which enlarge or diminish the scope of fundamental constitutional rights.
European Union Law
  • Rights given to people under EU law prevail over the express terms of UK law, including Acts of Parliament made or passed after coming into force of the 1972 Act.
  • Under s 2 HRA 1998 the UK courts are obliged to take into account all the rules laid down by the ECHR when considering a claim involving the rights contained in s 1 and Sch 1 HRA 1998.
Constitutional Conventions
  • Constitutional conventions are binding political rules many of which may be stated with the same precision as laws.
  • Laws are enforceable in courts. Conventions are not: there are no judicial remedies or penalties if conventions are violated.
  • Constitutional conventions are, generally speaking, binding political rules.
  • A constitutional convention is binding. A usage is a non-binding rule of political practice.
  • The key principle is that a constitutional convention has no legal effect in limiting the legislative power of Parliament.
  • The courts may be prepared to take constitutional conventions into account and give an opinion as to their existence and extent.
  • The courts can take constitutional conventions into account to interpret the statutes or commonwealth constitutions.
  • A constitutional convention can become law by statute.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sion v Hampstead Health Authority [1994] EWCA Civ 26

Facts: S appealed against the High Court’s decision to strike out his statement of claim for personal injury damages on the grounds that no reasonable cause of action was disclosed. S brought an action against the hospital alleging their negligent treatment of his son caused him to suffer psychiatric injury. Ratio: Appeal dismissed. However, even where a statement of claim disclosed no cause of action, the court had discretion to permit the plaintiff to amend it out of time provided that the proposed amendment arose from the facts in the pleading. S was unable to recover for psychiatric harm sustained as a result of watching his son die over a period of 14 days while becoming increasingly aware that the hospital was negligent in its treatment of him.
Read more

Summarise and discuss Lord Bingham’s eight ‘sub-rules’ of the Rule of Law.

Lord Bingham based his view about the rule of law on three key assumptions: Everyone should be equally bound by and entitled to the benefit of the law. Laws must be publicly and prospectively published. Laws should be publicly administered in the courts. The law must be accessible, intelligible, clear and predictable. Bingham’s rule of law suggests that it cannot exist without democracy. The rule of law is a kind of implicit contract between the state and the individual.
Read more

R. (on the application of Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2002] EWCA Civ 1598, (2002)

Facts: The first claimant was a British national who had been captured by the United States forces in Afghanistan and detained in Guantanamo Bay as an 'enemy combatant' He was deprived of access to court proceedings and legal advice, and applied for judicial review in the UK seeking to compel the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs either to intervene with the US government or alternatively to explain the omission to do so Issue: Whether the court had jurisdiction to review the decision by the Secretary of State not to intervene Whether the UK government had any duty to protect the claimant as one of its citizens Held: The Court could review the decisions on grounds of rationality and legitimate expectation The Court held that there was no legal duty on the state to protect its citizens in such circumstances
Read more