Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Constitutional and Administrative Law > Constitutional Law > Flashcards

Constitutional Law Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

Marbury v Madison

A

Possibility for US Supreme Court to invalidate laws which contradict the constitution

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Thoburn v Sunderland CC

A

Laws - constitutional hierarchy of statute - some statutes should not be subject to implied repeal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Reference to the Amendment to the Constitution of Canada

A

While the court will recognise the existence of conventions, they are not subject to their jurisdiction and cannot be enforced

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Madzimbamuto v Lardner-Burke

A

Although UK Parliament could legally legislate for Rhodesia, it would contradict conention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

AG v Jonathan Cape (Crossman Diaries)

A

Court will discuss conventions as potential interpretive aids but will not enforce them like laws

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Crichel Downs

A

Four categories of accountability to government

1) Explicit order made by minister - must protect civil servant (responsible)
2) Civil servant acts in accordance with minister’s policies (responsible - resign)
3) Official makes a mistake or delay, but not on an important issue (accountable)
4) Official has taken reprehensible action of which minister disapproves and has no knowledge (accountable)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

McGonnell v UK

A

Judiciary must be independent from administrative body that made the decision

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Duport Steels v Sirs

A

Diplock - it cannot be too strongly emphasised that the British Constitution is firmly based on the separation of powers: Parliament makes the laws, the judiciary interprets them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Burmah Oil v Lord Advocate

A

If courts go too far in their interpretive duty, Parliament can always legislate to reduce impact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Magor and St Mellons v Newport Corporation

A

Judicial activism ‘fills in the gaps’ vs ‘naked usurpation of the parliamentary role’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

R v R

A

Court ‘restated the old law correctly’ by making marital rape a crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland

A

Courts intervened to allow the victim’s life support to be switched off - Parliament would have taken too long

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Malone v MPC

A

Judicial deference - courts were unwilling to create new categories of privacy rights

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

R (Nicklinson) v MoJ

A

Courts reluctant to rule on assisted suicide - matter for elected body

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Sirros v Moore

A

Judges are immune from suit in regards to their judgement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Ex parte Venables v Thompson

A

Certain judicial roles can be exercised by Home Secretary - must act objectively and fairly

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

R (Evans) v AG

A

A decision of a court is binding and cannot be ignored or set aside by anyone, including the executive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

R (Anderson) v SoSHD

A

Reduction in judicial power of Home Secretary

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

M v Home Office

A

Home Secretary criticised for ignoring a court order - equally binding on the executive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

R (Jackson) v AG

A

Hope - Step by step the English principle of the absolute legislative sovereignty of Parliament is being qualified. The rule of law enforced in courts is the ultimate controlling factor of our constitution
Steyn - Parliamentary sovereignty should not be uncontrolled force within the constitution - courts may have to intervene in cases of conflict between PS and RoL

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

R (Corner House Research) v SFO

A

Bingham - all persons are bound by and entitled to the benefit of laws publicly made, generally taking effect in the future and publicly administered by the courts

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

IRC v Rossminster

A

Denning advocated that laws should be inherently moral to be legal
Wilberforce - inviolability of implemented laws

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Entick v Carrington

A

There must be clear legal basis for government action

24
Q

Ex parte Fewings

A

Local authorities must act intra vires and within proper purpose of the statute

25
Q

Ex parte Simms

A

Freedom of speech as lifeblood of democracy - fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words - interpretive duty

26
Q

Sunday Times v UK

A

Law must be sufficiently clear

27
Q

Liversidge v Anderson

A

Courts deferred to Government due to national emergency

Atkins (minority view) - more executive minded than the executive

28
Q

Ex parte Cheblak

A

Home Secretary’s decision to deport was not questioned due to Gulf War

29
Q

Ex parte Hosenball

A

Home Secretary’s decision to deport American journalist not questioned by courts on grounds of national security

30
Q

Ex parte Gallagher

A

Judicial deference to executive during times of war where disclosure of classified information could interfere with national security

31
Q

Bancoult v SoSHD

A

Unwilling to interfere in decision due to issues of international diplomacy and treaty obligations

32
Q

A & Others

A

Distinguished from LvA - courts did not automatically defer to executive in determining emergency situation due to the significant restrictions on liberty involved - relative institutional competency

33
Q

Ahmed v HM Treasury

A

Challenge to freezing order upheld as he had no opportunity to address the charges (unfairness)

34
Q

Osborn v Parole Board

A

Common law as a deposit for fundamental rights and values

35
Q

Vauxhall Estates, Ellen St Estates

A

A later act impliedly repeals an earlier act which legislate on the same area

36
Q

AG for NSW v Trethowan

A

A non-sovereign Parliament (e.g. devolved) can be bound by entrenchment clauses, UK parliament (sovereign) cannot

37
Q

Edinburgh & Dalkeith Railway v Wauchope

A

Act could not be questioned despite not having received a full debate in Parliament

38
Q

Pickin v BRB

A

Enrolled bill role (Morris)

39
Q

Van Gend en Loos

A

EC constitutes a new legal order of international law

40
Q

Costa v ENEL

A

EC law is supreme to domestic law

41
Q

Bulmer v Bollinger

A

Incoming tide of EU law

42
Q

Felixstowe Docks

A

Denning - reluctance to embrace EC supremacy principle

43
Q

Garland v BREL

A

Diplock - the words of the statute are to be construed, if they are reasonably capable of bearing such a meaning, as intended to carry out the obligation

44
Q

Factortame

A

Where statute cannot be interpreted in accordance with EU law, it must be disapplied in so far as to make it compatible
Bridge - interpretation that Parliament never intended to legislate in an incompatible manner

45
Q

Axa Insurance v Lord Advocate

A

Acts of Scottish Parliament do not have immunity from judicial review

46
Q

R (HS2 Alliance) v SoS Transport

A

Argued that bill did not allow for full participation for those affected
Neuberger - EU law ill not necessarily take precedence over other constitutional statutes

47
Q

BBC v Johns

A

Diplock - it is 350 years and a civil war too late for the Queen’s courts to broaden the prerogative

48
Q

AG v De Keyser’s Hotel

A

Statute prevails over prerogative powers where they act on the same area - prerogative is in ‘abeyance’ until statute is repealed

49
Q

Ex parte Fire Brigades Union

A

Home Secretary tried to use prerogative powers to amend statutory compensation scheme -criticised by courts for ignoring Parliamentary intention

50
Q

R (Miller) v SoS for Exiting the EU

A

Government does not have prerogative power to deprive citizens of rights

51
Q

Case of Proclamations

A

Monarch could only act under prerogative powers already established

52
Q

GCHQ

A

There is no logical reason why the fact that the source of power is the prerogative and not statute should deprive the citizen of the right to challenge the manner of its exercise (Roskill)
Roskill’s list of inherently non-justiciable matters: defence of the realm, treaties, mercy, honours, appointing ministers and dissolution of Parliament

53
Q

Ex parte Bentley

A

Courts felt able to review the Home Secretary’s decision not to grant an initial pardon to an accused murdere hanged in controversial circumstances

54
Q

Ex parte Everett

A

Passport decisions are reviewable

55
Q

Ex parte Abbasi

A

Low intensity of review when interfering with foreign policy

56
Q

Ex parte Rees-Mogg

A

Low intensity of review (diplomatic implications) - only if irrational or in bad faith

Constitutional and Administrative Law (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions