Parliamentary Sovereignty and Parliamentary Privilege

Question 1

An Act of Parliament is made by the House of Commons and the House of Lords. True or false?

Answer 1

False, royal assent must also be given

Question 2

Which of the following can an Act of Parliament not do?

a) break international law
b) legislate on any subject
c) prevent a law from being changed (bind future parliaments)

Answer 2

c) prevent a law from being changed (bind future parliaments)

Question 3

An Act of Parliament may contain a special procedure referendum for its repeal. True or false?

Answer 3

True, but this can also be ignored

Question 4

EU Law had supremacy over an Act of Parliament because:
a) the EU claimed this right
b) a UK Act of Parliament permitted it
c) the Supreme Court agreed

Answer 4

b) a UK Act of Parliament permitted it

Question 5

Under what circumstances can a Member of Parliament be prosecuted?

Answer 5

MP’s have no immunity from criminal law

Question 6

A media report of a debate in Parliament:
a) is completely protected from a defamation action
b) has no protection from a defamation action
c) is protected from a defamation action if it is fair and accurate

Answer 6

c) is protected from a defamation action if it is fair and accurate

Question 7

Can the House of Lords reject a parliamentary bill?

Answer 7

No, only delay it by 1 year

Question 8

Is an Act of Parliament passed without the agreement of the House of Lords still valid?

Answer 8

Yes

Question 9

Can Parliament pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change?

Answer 9

No

Question 10

What is an express repeal?

Answer 10

A new act will expressly repeal the previous act, or parts of the previous act.

Question 11

What is an implied repeal?

Answer 11

If two Acts contradict each other, the later Act is the law.an

Question 12

Can all Acts be impliedly repealed?

Answer 12

No, some fundamental Acts can only be expressly repealed.

Question 13

Can the UK take back the devolved powers of Scotland, Wales and NI?

Answer 13

Yes

Question 14

If an Act of Parliament expressly restricts a human right, must the Courts accept this?

Answer 14

Yes

Question 15

What is parliamentary procedure?

Answer 15

Grants legal immunities to MP’s and Lords so that they can perform their duties free from outside interference

Question 16

What is Absolute Privilege and when does it apply?

Answer 16

What is said or written by an MP or Lord is not liable for defamation, even if the statement is untrue or malicious. Applies only during Parliamentary Proceedings inside of Parliament

Question 17

What is Qualified Privilege and when does it apply?

Answer 17

What is said or written by an MP or Lord is not liable for defamation, if there was a public interest in making the statement and the statement was not malicious. Applies to statements outside of parliament.

Question 18

Will the courts allow for parliamentary proceedings to be used as evidence?

Answer 18

No, unless it is to decide the meaning of the statute, in which case they will look at the record of a parliamentary debate

Question 19

Can MP’s be arrested for civil matters?

Answer 19

No, only criminal

Question 20

Who investigates serious rule breaches by MP’s?

Answer 20

The Committee on Standards and Privileges

Question 21

After parliamentary debates have finished for the day two MPs adjourn to the House of Commons bar. After a few drinks, they quarrel and A hits B in the face. Would this be dealt with as a
criminal offence?

Answer 21

Probably not. The Speaker would be able to deal with the matter and punish A for his misbehaviour. If A had committed a serious offence, Parliament would vote to waive its
privilege, as in R v Chaytor above, and allow the police to prosecute.

Question 22

A client approaches a solicitor about a parliamentary Bill that he opposes. The House of Commons has agreed to it twice, but the House of Lords has rejected it.

What steps could the client take to prevent the Bill becoming law?

A. The client could petition the monarch to refuse the royal assent.
B. The client could ask the Supreme Court to declare the Bill unconstitutional.
C. The client could petition the House of Lords to reject the Bill again.
D. The client could petition the monarch, but they would not refuse the royal assent.
E. The client could petition the House of Commons to reconsider.

Answer 22

D. The client could petition the monarch, but they would not refuse the royal assent.

Question 23

A campaigning group that protects the rights of children claims that a new Children’s Act contravenes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The UK is a party to this
international treaty.

Which of the following is the most likely outcome for the group?

A. The group could apply to the European Court of Human Rights.
B. The group could apply to the International Court of Justice, which is the court of the United Nations.
C. The group could apply to a UK court, but that court would enforce the Children’s Act.
D. The group could apply to a UK court and that court would hold the Children’s Act invalid.
E. The group could apply to a UK court and that court would declare that the Children’s Act was incompatible with human rights.

Answer 23

C. The group could apply to a UK court, but that court would enforce the Children’s Act.

Question 24

A client has had his land confiscated by an Act of Parliament. He claims that, contrary to Parliament’s own standing orders, he was not notified that this was being considered, so he was unable
to put forward his arguments that the Bill should not be passed.

Which of the following is the most likely decision of the court in this matter?

A. The court will investigate whether the client’s claim was true.
B. The court will declare the Act to be invalid.
C. The court will interpret the Act so that it does not deprive the client of his right to property.
D. The court will judicially review the Act for breach of natural justice.
E. The court will not investigate the client’s claim.

Answer 24

E. The court will not investigate the client’s claim.

Question 25

During a debate in the House of Commons, an MP accuses a famous businessman of a serious criminal offence. The MP is interviewed outside Parliament, where he repeats the allegation. A
newspaper reports the debate and the interview with the MP. The businessman wants to sue for defamation.

Which of the following best summarises the legal position?

A. Only the MP can be sued.
B. Only the newspaper can be sued.
C. Neither the newspaper nor the MP can be sued.
D. The MP cannot be sued.
E. Both the MP and newspaper can be sued.

Answer 25

A. Only the MP can be sued.

Question 26

A client is an MP, who is employed as a parliamentary consultant, by the Road Transport Group, at an annual salary of £10,000. The Road Transport Group opposes proposed new restrictions
on the hours worked by lorry drivers. The Group instructs their consultant MP to vote against these measures in Parliament and say that they will no longer employ him if he refuses.

Which of the following best summarises the position of the client?

A. An MP cannot have a job with an outside body.
B. An MP cannot receive any payments from an outside body.
C. An MP can be dismissed from their consultancy with an outside body.
D. An MP cannot be instructed on how to vote by an outside body.
E. An MP can have a job with an outside body.

Answer 26

D. An MP cannot be instructed on how to vote by an outside body.