Constitution of UK - Consolidation MCQs Flashcards
Which one of the following best describes the mix of sources of constitutional rules in the UK?
The UK’s constitutional ‘rules’ comprise a mixture of legal rules, which come from statute, and the common law, as well as non-legal rules, which comprise constitutional conventions, the law and customs of Parliament, and academic opinion.
The UK’s constitutional ‘rules’ comprise a mixture of legal rules, which come from constitutional statutes, EU law and the common law (including the recognition of prerogative powers), as well as non-legal rules, which comprise conventions, the law and customs of Parliament, and academic opinion.
The UK’s constitutional ‘rules’ comprise a mixture of legal rules, including constitutional statutes, EU law and the common law, as well as non-legal rules including conventions, the law and customs of Parliament, and academic opinion.
The UK’s constitutional ‘rules’ primarily derive from non-legal sources, notably constitutional conventions, which are far more prevalent in the UK than in other states, although these rules have been supplemented in recent decades by a number of “constitutional statutes”.
The UK’s constitutional ‘rules’ comprise a mixture of legal rules, including constitutional statutes, EU law and the common law, as well as non-legal rules including conventions, the law and customs of Parliament, and academic opinion, all of which have equal status.
The UK’s constitutional ‘rules’ comprise a mixture of legal rules, which come from constitutional statutes, EU law and the common law (including the recognition of prerogative powers), as well as non-legal rules, which comprise conventions, the law and customs of Parliament, and academic opinion.
At the recent (fictitious) general election, the new government party obtained a majority of seats on the basis of a manifesto in which “the need for enhanced security measures” was emphasised strongly. A few months afterwards the new Home Secretary sponsored legislation in relation to anti-terrorism powers. This passed through the House of Commons, but the Bill was met with opposition in the House of Lords which rejected the Bill on its second reading.
Which one of the following statements describes the best course of action open to the Home Secretary?
The Home Secretary should impress on the House of Lords that it is a legal obligation under the Salisbury convention to respect the mandate of the Commons, meaning that it must consent to the Bill when it is presented before it on the next occasion.
The Home Secretary should impress on the House of Lords that it has a constitutional obligation under the Sewel convention to respect the mandate of the Commons, meaning that it should consent to the Bill when it is presented before it on the next occasion.
The Home Secretary should impress on the House of Lords that it has a constitutional obligation under the Salisbury convention to respect the mandate of the Commons, meaning that it should consent to the Bill when it is presented before it on the next occasion.
The Home Secretary should impress on the House of Lords that it has an obligation to consent to the Bill when it presented before it on the next occasion, as the matter relates to national security which is a matter on which the Lords should defer to the electoral mandate of the Commons.
The Home Secretary should impress on the House of Lords that since the House of Lords is an unelected body, it is unconstitutional for it to refuse to consent to the Bill.
The Home Secretary should impress on the House of Lords that it has a constitutional obligation under the Salisbury convention to respect the mandate of the Commons, meaning that it should consent to the Bill when it is presented before it on the next occasion.
Which one of the following statements best describes the essential character of the UK’s constitution?
The UK’s constitution is dominated by relics of its historical past in the form of a monarch as head of government, a hereditary House of Lords as a significant part of Parliament, and the continued survival of royal prerogative powers.
The UK’s constitution is famously a highly flexible one with effectively no controls over how the political leaders of the day wish to exercise their power other than purely conventional ones.
The primary source of constitutional law in the UK is case law, although other sources of constitutional law, such as Acts of Parliament and constitutional conventions also play an important role.
The UK is a constitutional state with no formal constitution. Its lack of entrenched constitutional rules in a founding document is significant but this does not mean to say that there are no legal or conventional protections preserving constitutional values and standards.
The UK effectively has no constitution at all, given the absence of any codified and entrenched set of constitutional rules and protections.
The UK is a constitutional state with no formal constitution. Its lack of entrenched constitutional rules in a founding document is significant but this does not mean to say that there are no legal or conventional protections preserving constitutional values and standards.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer has been given powers by Parliament under the (fictitious) Emergency Revenue Regulations (“the Regs”) to impose a windfall tax on internet search companies which “the Chancellor deems to have paid a disproportionately low amount of corporation tax in the preceding financial year.” This year the Chancellor is very busy preparing the Budget and has delegated responsibility for the Regs to a senior Treasury civil servant.
Which one of the following statements best describes the constitutional position if a company alleges that these powers have been misused?
Before deciding to delegate powers under the Regs, the Chancellor was legally obliged to report to Parliament and request the necessary authority to delegate.
The general principle is that powers given by Parliament to particular members of the Executive should be exercised by that person. When these are precise powers, outlined in statute, as here, it is necessary, legally and politically, for the Chancellor to have made the relevant decision in respect of the use of the powers.
Although there is a degree of conventional pressure on the Chancellor to make the decisions to exercise these powers, in reality there are no legal controls or rights of review over who has actually exercised them.
The general principle is that powers given by Parliament to particular members of the Executive should be exercised by that person. However, there is a recognition in both constitutional and legal terms, that delegation is necessary in the interests of governmental efficiency and so it would not be unlawful for delegation in this situation to the civil servant.
The general principle is that powers given by Parliament to particular ministers in the Executive should be exercised by that person. However, there is a recognition in both constitutional and legal terms, that delegation is necessary in the interests of governmental efficiency and so it would not be unlawful for delegation in this situation to the civil servant. The Chancellor would, however, remain responsible for these actions in the political arena.
The general principle is that powers given by Parliament to particular ministers in the Executive should be exercised by that person. However, there is a recognition in both constitutional and legal terms, that delegation is necessary in the interests of governmental efficiency and so it would not be unlawful for delegation in this situation to the civil servant. The Chancellor would, however, remain responsible for these actions in the political arena.
Which one of the following statements is an accurate description of a key aspect of the constitutional structure of the United Kingdom?
The powers of the UK Supreme Court are more limited than that of the US Supreme Court, as it is not possible for the UK Supreme Court to invalidate primary legislation.
The existence of prerogative powers, being powers held in the name of the monarch, and including the power to declare war, means that the political power of the monarch in the UK is significant.
Ministers who intentionally breach the Ministerial Code will be directed by the Speaker of the House to resign.
Certain constitutional conventions, such as the Sewel convention, which regulates aspects of the relationship between England and Scotland, have such significance that the courts will be willing to enforce them in certain circumstances.
In the UK the Executive is responsible for the enactment of law. The legislature is responsible for scrutinising and (where necessary) amending the law, and the judiciary is responsible for the administration of justice according to the law.
The powers of the UK Supreme Court are more limited than that of the US Supreme Court, as it is not possible for the UK Supreme Court to invalidate primary legislation.
Question 1
The Government is considering introducing a compensation scheme for victims of some recent floods.
Which of the following best describes the options available to the Government in relation to the royal prerogative?
A In the absence of statutory authority, the Government cannot use prerogative powers.
B By convention the Government should use statutory powers rather than prerogative powers.
C The Government can use prerogative powers to introduce a compensation scheme less generous than an existing statutory scheme.
D In the absence of a statutory scheme, the Government should be able to adopt a non-statutory scheme and raise funds pursuant to its prerogative powers.
E In the absence of a statutory scheme, the Government should be able to adopt a non-statutory scheme pursuant to its prerogative powers, subject to Parliament voting the necessary funds.
Answer
Option E is correct. The type of scheme proposed in this question is similar to the criminal injuries compensation scheme that was set up using prerogative powers. However, Parliament will need to authorise expenditure, as the Government cannot use the prerogative to authorise expenditure; hence option D is wrong.
Option A is wrong because prerogative powers are by definition non-statutory. In the relatively rare fields where statutory and prerogative powers co-exist, there is no evidence of a convention that the Government should use statutory powers; therefore option B is wrong. Option C is also wrong as the Government cannot use a prerogative power in a way that contradicts a statutory power.
Question 2
The Government is proposing to introduce legislation in Parliament that would breach a recognised constitutional convention.
Which of the following best describes the constitutional implications of the Government’s proposals?
A Any legislation passed by Parliament that breaches a recognised constitutional convention risks being struck down by the Supreme Court.
B The courts will ignore the constitutional convention and apply the legislation.
C Although the courts will recognise the constitutional convention, they will nevertheless apply the legislation.
D The courts will recognise the constitutional convention, but they will apply the legislation if the breach of the convention is reasonable.
E It will be illegal for the Government to introduce legislation in Parliament that breaches a recognised constitutional convention.
Answer
Option C is correct. Parliament is sovereign and legally can pass any legislation it pleases. The courts will recognise the convention’s existence, but this will not stop them applying the legislation.
Option A is wrong because the courts do not have the power to strike down legislation. Option D is wrong as the courts will apply the legislation irrespective of the convention and whether the breach is reasonable or not. Equally, there is no legal limit on the type of legislation that the Government can introduce; hence option E is wrong. On the other hand, the courts will not ignore the convention, so option B is wrong.
Question 3
A bill has passed through all stages in Parliament and has been submitted to the Monarch for Royal Assent. The Leader of the Opposition has called on the Monarch to refuse Royal Assent as the bill, on the Government’s own admission, breaches international law.
Will the Monarch refuse Royal Assent?
A No, because by convention the Monarch always grants Royal Assent to a bill that has been passed by Parliament.
B No, because by law the Monarch must always grant Royal Assent to a bill that has been passed by Parliament.
C Yes, because it is unconstitutional for Parliament to pass a bill that breaches international law.
D Yes, because the bill is invalid due to its breach of international law.
E Yes, because international law is a higher form of law, which the Monarch must obey.
Answer
Option A is correct. Indeed, the last time the Monarch refused Royal Assent to a bill was in 1707. Option B is wrong as it is by convention that the Monarch grants Royal Assent; there
is no law to that effect. Parliament is sovereign and can pass Acts that breach international law, and there is no precedent for the Monarch to refuse Royal Assent in those circumstances. Hence options D and E are wrong so far as the UK constitution is concerned.
Whilst there might be academic debate whether or not it is ‘unconstitutional’ for Parliament to breach international law, that will not affect the granting of Royal Assent, so option C
is wrong.
