Implied limitations on legislative power in the United Kingdom
Access status:
Open Access
Type
ArticleAuthor/s
Twomey, AnneAbstract
The ban on fox-hunting in the United Kingdom provoked large protests and a number of legal challenges. The English Court of Appeal and the House of Lords, while upholding the validity of the Hunting Act 2004 (UK), added to the controversy by accepting that the courts could determine ...
See moreThe ban on fox-hunting in the United Kingdom provoked large protests and a number of legal challenges. The English Court of Appeal and the House of Lords, while upholding the validity of the Hunting Act 2004 (UK), added to the controversy by accepting that the courts could determine the validity of an Act of Parliament, contrary to the accepted principle of parliamentary supremacy, and that there were implied limitations on the power of the Westminster Parliament to enact laws under the Parliament Act 1911 (UK). For good measure, the courts added warnings about the use of the Parliament Act to push through "undemocratic" measures. This article examines the judgments and draws parallels with the position in Australia.
See less
See moreThe ban on fox-hunting in the United Kingdom provoked large protests and a number of legal challenges. The English Court of Appeal and the House of Lords, while upholding the validity of the Hunting Act 2004 (UK), added to the controversy by accepting that the courts could determine the validity of an Act of Parliament, contrary to the accepted principle of parliamentary supremacy, and that there were implied limitations on the power of the Westminster Parliament to enact laws under the Parliament Act 1911 (UK). For good measure, the courts added warnings about the use of the Parliament Act to push through "undemocratic" measures. This article examines the judgments and draws parallels with the position in Australia.
See less
Date
2006Source title
Australian Law JournalVolume
80Issue
1Publisher
Thomson ReutersLicence
Copyright All Rights ReservedRights statement
This article was published by Thomson Reuters and should be cited as: Twomey, A. (2006). Implied limitations on legislative power in the United Kingdom. Australian Law Journal, 80(1), 40–52. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase. This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited. PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039. legal.thomsonreuters.com.auFaculty/School
The University of Sydney Law SchoolShare