PLUS Flashcards
How do we regulate perogitive powers
- parliamnet holds the executive to account i.e. debate in parliamnet over the bombing of syria
- powers need to be sanctioned, if you want to use them make sure they are justified
- can be regulated by act of parliament
- judicary may scrutinise them
- can create convention whereby you do not use perogative without permission
De Keysers Royal Hotel
Hous eof lords decided that where a power was used for a purpose already provided for in statute, the statutory power would prevail.
BBC v Johns
from 1965 no new perogatives created. future power must come from parliament in the form of statute
R v SSHD (northumbria police authority)
the police act provided for appuratus to be supplied to the police, told they were allowed heavy dudty artllery in order to control protests at the time. this was found to be ok due to perogative of was, courts said that parliamnet were broadening the pereogative power to compliment the statutry power. this seems to contradict de keyser as suggests that perogatives and statutes are one and equal
Perogatives
In relation to foreign affairs, the powers cover:
the recognition of foreign states;
the declaration of war;
the making of treaties;
the accreditation of diplomats; and
the deployment of armed forces in the UK and abroad.
In relation to domestic matters, the powers include:
the appointment and dismissal of ministers;
the issuing and withdrawal of passports;
the appointment of Queen’s Counsel;
the dissolution of Parliament;
the granting of honours;
appointments to, and employment conditions of, the civil service;
the commissioning and regulation of the armed forces; and
the calling of elections.
There is also the prerogative of ‘mercy’, which affects the judicial system. It means that ‘pardons’ can be granted in relation to a criminal conviction (i.e. it used to allow the withdrawal of the death penalty), or legal proceedings can be halted against an individual.
Bancoult no. 1
this was about the commisioner attemptign to remove the entire population of the chagos islands. this was deemed under the wednesbury test to be unreasonables excerisise of the commisisoners power- done under judicial review
Bancoult no. 2
he majority’s conclusion was that although the exercise of prerogative was reviewable, the decision to prevent resettlement was not an abuse of power. It was also decided by the same majority that the islanders did not have a legitimate expectation of resettlement because the Government’s statements in 2000 did not amount to a clear and unambiguous promise.
CCSU case
PM banned trade union membership for workers of GCHQ.
This casesees the existance of judical review for the royal perogative.
It was not found to be a breach by the PM but lord diplock tried to determine the cases for jdicial review as
- procedural impropriety
- illegality
- irrationality.
He also discussed the fact that this was by no means a cloased list and with the existance of proportiality within the EEC, he saw this as soon becoming a ground.
Tay tourist trips
this encompasses ILLEGALITY. the body must ot act out with (ultra vires) the power that has been confered on them.
sometimes have issue re ‘errors of law’ in england they are all reviewable but in scotland some are intra vires i.e. that the decision maker will not be challanged
Wednesbury
Irrationality- this is often demmed as the ‘wednesbury unreasonablness’
it is such an outrageuos defianve of logic. this is hard to meet
Procedural imporpiety
need to adhere to statutoru requirements and procedures but also to the law of natural justice like common law rule of fair process.
also law against bias- nemo iiudex in sua causa- concerns the impartiality of the decision make himself. ‘justice must not only be done but must also be manifestly seen to be done’- Barrs v Brittish wool making
Also the right to a hearing - audi alterum partem
also have ECHR art 6 the right to fair hearing and procedural fairness- this may also be a ground for jusidcial review.
SA s. 44
there shall be a scottish executive with a first minster, ministers under s.47 (cabinet minsiters), lrod advocate and solicitor general
SA s. 52
ministers are collectively resposnible for any actions of the scottish government. They must all work together.
it is activly provided for in statute
s. 44 and 45
The queen appoints the first minister after the reccomendation of the presiding officer. the parliamnet must support the FM and if do not then FM expected to resign
s. 46 before reccomendation by PO
- after holding of election- the governemnt continuosuly flows
- if FM resigns- henry macleish 2001 and salmond 2014
- office becomes empty for other resoans- donald dewar
- if FM ceases to become an MSP
Parliament has to approve- this is different from UK (on collective level)
Law officers
lord advocate and deputy solicitor general. they used to offer legal advice to UK now are scottish legal advisors
- no equivilent position in other devolved nations
- help appoint judges and discuss competence of parliament
- do not need to be an MSP
- Advocate general advises the UK
s. 48 they must excersise their powers (lord advocate as head of criminal prosecutions and investigations of deaths) seperatly to avoid political interference - neither considered members of the cabinet and cannot vote
role of monarch in scotland
appoints FM and approves ministers and junior ministers. her role is formal ratehr than substantive. she recieves cabinet meeting notes but does not have the power to advise and warn as she does witht he UK parliament
we do not have an
equivilent of the queens speech
FM powers
appoint/dissmiss ministers
these are exclsuive powers so cannto be excersissed by any other memeber of SP.
- powers detailed in s.52
sources of executive powers
within competences
powers directly conferred from westminster parliament- scotland does not have power to take them away.
thee powers on the executive cannot be excerissed or infringed by the UK ministers except extreme circumstances
s. 56
details the shared powers such as s. 17 of trasport act
s. 57
provisions re ECHR and EU, the Uk can intervene in certain circumstances in order to ensure they are complying witht he natioanl obligations. this makes sense as if something goes wrong it is te UK who will be held responsible (commission v belgium)
scotland also cannot make subordinate legislationa against EU and ECHR
s.58
caviat allowing Uk to intervene. says secretary of state can stop or order scottish governemnt from doing somehting if it looks as though they are going to contravene their competences.
a s. 58 trigger ha not occured yet- would need to be in very serious circumstances
memorandum of undertsnading
regulates how various UK admisitrations work together. this is a statement of politicial intent and is in no way legally binding
re scotland- there must be good transfer of informations, need for confidentiality yet asks for transparency and openness.
memorundum is supplemented by 4 smaller agreements thta say that the UK should conslut and take account of other nations views before making decions re EU, finaincial changes ect.
joint minsiterial commitee
meet and discuss policy issues to ensure everyone’s views are heard
civil service
this is a reserved matter athough SNP have campaigned for a devolved service. this was an issue in the referendum as many of the civil service were responsible for craeting the whiet paper detailignt he devolution settlement- concerns they were not keeping their political neuatrality.