Relationships between Branches - Judiciary

Question 1

What is the order of importance of the senior Judiciary?

Answer 1

The High Court and Crown Court are a collection courts dealing with civil law disputes and criminal law cases. The Court of Appeal are the courts that hear the appeals from lower courts. They can hear any civil or criminal appeals. The Supreme Court is the highest Court in the UK - of England, Wales, Scotland AND Northern Ireland. It only hears appeals from lower courts on significant interpretations of law.

Question 2

What separate system? Isn’t it all the same for Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland?

Answer 2

For criminal cases, the Supreme Court is the final court of appeal only for England, Wales and N.I because Scotland has a separate criminal law system/

Question 3

What five roles do the senior judiciary take on board?

Answer 3

They DISPENSE JUSTICE They INTERPRET the Law. They ESTABLISH CASE LAW. They DECLARE AND INTERPRET common law. They CONDUCT JUDICIAL REVIEWS.

Question 4

Judicial Review The importance of judicial review in constraining politicians - 2013 Example

Answer 4

In 2013, the Save Lewisham Hospital took Jeremy Hunt, who was then Health Secretary, to judicial review over his decision to place cuts in the hospital, especially in the maternity and emergency departments. His decision to do this was squashed and he lost because he had acted outside of his legal powers and breached the NHS Act 2006.

Question 5

Judicial Review Civil Liberties implications examples

Answer 5

A decision can be reviewed if it has abused civil liberties in that it contravenes with the Human Rights Act - A and others V Secretary of State for Home Department 2004 (David Blunkett) was a famous one because it found that anti-terror laws contradicted the HRA on the basis that citizens who were detained did not face trial before this. It led to the passing of the Prevention of Terrorism Act in 2005.

Question 6

Judicial Review What did former CONS leader Lord Howard say about JR?

Answer 6

He said that the unelected and unaccountable judges entered the realm of political decision making.

Question 7

Judicial Review What Act was passed and by who, that limited JR?

Answer 7

2013 = govt restricted cases that could apply for legal aid, also raising court costs with Grayling saying he wanted to drive out ‘meritless applications’

Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, and David Cameron passed the Criminal Justice and Courts Act in 2015 which aimed to limit judicial review.

Question 8

Judicial Review STATS

Answer 8

2013 peak = 15,000 + applications (most refused)

2014 = 4062 cases were heard - but only 36% of these were successful and led to a change in decision.

2015-2019, applications fell by 44%

Question 9

Judicial Review What if there are vast areas of public concern? What happens then?

Answer 9

Senior judges may conduct public inquiries into issues of large public concern This can be seen through the Leveson Inquiry 2012 into the cultures, practices, and ethics of the British Press.

Question 10

The Constitutional Reform Act 2005

Answer 10

This Act provided some key constitutional changes. The biggest one was: THE NEW Supreme Court FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE UK. This replaced the Law Lords in the Lords being the highest Appellate Court in the UK. It was based at the heart of Westminster, directly opposing Parliament. Cases were first heard in October 2009.

Question 11

Who is the current President of the Supreme Court?

Answer 11

Currently, it is Lord Reed, and he was appointed at the beginning of 2020. The Senior Supreme Court judge has the title of President of the Supreme Court.

Question 12

Who was the previous President of the Supreme Court?

Answer 12

Baroness Hale of Richmond was the previous Supreme Court President from September 2017 to January 2020. Her most famous and recent (as president) ruling was the one where she stated that Johnson had behaved unlawfully after he advised the queen to prorogue Parliament.

Question 13

How was Baroness Hale of Richmond a trailblazer?

Answer 13

She was the first woman to be appointed to the Law Commission which is the body that promoted law reform. This happened in 1984. She played a significant role in advocating for the modernisation of the legal system in addition to the LANDMARK Children Act 1989 Reform.

Question 14

The O.G Supreme Court Justices

Answer 14

There are 12 strong Supreme Court was to be made up of the existing Law Lords. The first President of the S.C was Lord Neuberger. These 12 Judges are known as the Justices… the original ones remained members of the Lords BUT their voting rights were taken away from them.

Question 15

What happens when Supreme Court Justices retire?

Answer 15

They are replaced by non-Lords Judges. This is GREAT because it acts as a separation of powers from the judiciary and the legislature. Lady Black retired in January 2021 and will be replaced soon.

Question 16

Recruitment procedures outlined by Lord Reed:

Answer 16

They must have exceptional level of legal knowledge and intellectual capacity in addition to the knowledge of communities. They are looking for the ‘widest range’ of candidates - they want diversity.

Question 17

What were the main provisions of the 2005 Constitutional Reform Act?

Answer 17

The 12 most senior UK judges are labelled justices. The S.C is more open for public scrutiny than the previous Appellate Committee. It is the highest court of appeal for all the criminal cases in Wales, Northern Ireland and England. This is the final coat of appeal when there is a judicial review of the government’s actions.

Question 18

How is membership of the UK Supreme Courts decided?

Answer 18

The five-member Selection Commission makes up most senior judges in the UK… they decide the membership of the Supreme Court. These recommendations are then passed to the Justice Secretary for approval… they have this one opportunity to reject approval. The PM will ask the monarch to make the appointment.

Question 19

What did John Griffith say in 1977 about judges?

Answer 19

This radical, socialist academic argued in the POLITICS OF THE JUDICIARY that socially and politically, conservative judges will ALWAYS favour the status quo.

Question 20

How has the government retained political influence over the appointment of justices in the Supreme Court in the UK?

Answer 20

The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 merged the position of the Lord Chancellor with the Justice Secretary. The Justice Secretary does not need to have any legal knowledge. The Selection Committee MUST pass their recommendations onto the Justice Secretary - we do not have a complete separation of powers.

Question 21

How are senior judges selected?

Answer 21

Under the Constitution Reform Act 2005, judges are appointed by the Judicial Appointments Committee This Committee is made up of 15 people, 6 of whom are not judges. There is increasingly diverse representation of modern Britain… there is more diverse judiciary.

Question 22

MAIN criticism of the reform

Answer 22

The Constitutional Reform Act does not go far enough… these people believe we need a UK Bill of Rights which would establish greater separation of power.

Question 23

Judicial Activism? Gina Miller SJW???

Answer 23

The judge’s own perception of their role has changed in recent years… previously, they were seen as defenders of the state, but they are now more likely to challenge the state in favour of upholding civil liberties. This has been triggered since HRA 1998

Question 24

GINA MILLER CASE STUDY 2017

Answer 24

Following the EU referendum in June 2016, the government claimed that it could begin the process of leaving the EU through the exercise of the royal prerogative. In 2017 January, the Supreme Court upheld an earlier decision that was taken in the High Court stating that the government did NOT have the authority to do this. This case did not subvert anything as it simply just clarified constitutional principles.

Question 25

Why didn’t the government have the authority in the GINA MILLER CASE 2017?

Answer 25

In 1972, Parliament had voted for legislation enacting the membership with the EU… withdrawal would also remove legal rights from UK people which needed the consent of Parliament. People thought that since the High Court and Supreme Court both declared that Parliament must consent to the government opening negotiations to withdraw from the EU, the courts were attempting to change the referendum result… this is not true.

Question 26

GINA MILLER CASE STUDY 2019

Answer 26

The Court of Session at Edinburgh September rejected an attempt to prevent Johnson from proroguing Parliament in 2019. The English High Court then intervened… the Scottish Appeal Court concluded the judges did have the legal authority to act… the UK Supreme Court supported the Scottish decision. Lady Hale described it as - ‘this court has… concluded that the PM’s advice to her majesty was unlawful, void, and of no effect’

Question 27

GINA MILLER CASE STUDY 2019 Why was Johnson’s prorogation so abnormal?

Answer 27

It prevented Parliament from carrying out the constitutional role for 5/8 weeks between the end of summer recess and the exit day in October. When Parliament is prorogued, neither of the houses can meet, debate, pass legislation etc. The democratic effect was extreme.

Question 28

GINA MILLER CASE STUDY 2019 How did Boris Johnson respond to the Supreme Court ruling in 2019 about his unlawful prorogation?

Answer 28

He stated that he strongly disagrees with what the justices had found and he added that despite not believing it is right, that he would respect the decision by allowing Parliament to return. He accused people of wanting to ‘frustrate Brexit’ and ‘stop this country coming out of the EU’ John Bercow, speaker of the Commons, welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision, as the defender of Parliament.