Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

UK Government > supreme court > Flashcards

supreme court Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
U.S. Government Basics flashcards AP® U.S. Government flashcards American Government 101 flashcards
1
Q

Supreme Court

A

highest court in the uk political system

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

judicial neutrality

A

principle that judges should not be influenced by their personal political opinions and should remain outside of party politics

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

judicial independence

A

principle that judges should not be influenced by other branches of government, particularly the executive

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

elective dictatorship

A

a government that dominates parliament usually due to a large majority, and therefore has fewer limits on its power

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

judicial review

A

power of judiciary to review, and sometimes reverse, actions by other branches of government that breach the law or that are incompatible with the human rights act

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

ultra vires

A

‘beyond the powers’ of what is set out in statute law

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

when was the Supreme Court established?

A

after the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 and came into effect in 2009

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

where did the Supreme Court reside previous to the CRA 2005?

A

court was situated in the lords, as the Law Lords, which meant the judiciary was within the legislature

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

what did the role of the lord chancellor before the CRA 2005?

A

used to reside in all three branches as lord chief justice (head of Supreme Court), presiding officer of the lords (legislature), and a position in the cabinet

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

what does the role of the chancellor now look like?

A

lord chancellor combined with the role of justice secretary moved to the cabinet (executive), presiding officer in the lords became speaker in the lords (legislature), and lord chief justice is now the president of the Supreme Court (judiciary)

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

How can a justice be removed?

A

by a vote in both Houses of Parliament for misconduct, not for a decision made whilst on the bench

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

how does the JAC remove political interference?

A

it is a neutral commission entirely independent from the executive.

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

who is the current (may 2023) Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary?

A

Alex Chalk

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

who is the current (may 2023) president of the Supreme Court?

A

Lord Reed

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

who is the current (may 2023) speaker of the House of Lords?

A

Lord John Mcfall

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

what did the CRA 2005 establish in terms of power?

A

codified the independence of the court into the law and established clear separation of the judiciary from the executive and the legislature

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

what is the composition of the supreme court as of may 2023?

A

11 men, 1 woman

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

how are justices appointed?

A

special commission is created when a vacancy appears that hears applications from candidates. candidates have to have worked in a judicial high office for at least 2 years or 15 years as a solicitor

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

what can the minister for justice do in regard to candidates from justice?

A

may ask the court to reconsider their appointment, or can reject the candidate outright. however this power has never been used as they’d be saying they have no confidence in the person who is sitting as judge. evidence of some politicisation of the courts.

20
Q

what is the role of the Supreme Court?

A

to determine wether the law his being applied correctly and followed equally by everyone

21
Q

what can the courts not do?

A

strike down or repeal parliamentary legislation. cannot enforce their rulings

22
Q

why are the powers of the courts limited like this?

A

parliament is the only sovereign body to make, amend, or change legislation. parliament is not bound to follow the courts ruling.

23
Q

what is an action of public authority?

A

declared as it is unlawful fro a public body to act in a way that is ultra vires and is incompatible with a convention right

24
Q

what is aa declaration of incompatibility?

A

issued if legislation from Parliament is incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998. sends a clear message that the law is not compatible and should not be changed

25
Q

what did the human rights act 1998 do?

A

codified the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) into British Statute Law. this means that British citizens were bale to defend there rights from the ECHR in British courts, this widened the capacity of the judiciary to protect civil liberties and check the powers of the executive.

26
Q

AM Zimbabwe V Secretary of State for Home Department 2020

A

Zimbabwean citizen was faced with a deportation order after a series of conviction, his appeal was rejected by lower courts and went to the Supreme Court. SCOTUK ruled that his appeal should be heard under article 3 (freedom from torture, inhumane treatment) as he argued that his life may be in danger if he returned to Zimbabwe as he couldn’t access the HIV medication he needed

27
Q

Steinfeld and Another V Secretary of State for Education 2017

A

court issued a declaration based on the 2004 civil partnership act not allowing opposite sex couples to enter a civil partnership as a breach of the HRA

28
Q

Belmarsh case context

A

Anti-terrorisim, Crime, and Security Act 2001 which allowed indefinite detention without trial of foreign suspects of terrorism.

29
Q

Belmarsh case ruling

A

8-1 that detention was incompatible with article 5 (right to liberty), and 14 (protection against discrimination) under the HRA

30
Q

Belmarsh case significant in support of the courts power

A

government repealed part 3 of the 2001 act and replaced it with the Prevention of terrorism act (a series of control orders). Detainees were released from custody and subject to the new system of supervision

31
Q

Belmarsh Case significance in against the supreme courts power

A

even though parliament acted on the judgement, the suspected terrorists had to remain in prison until legislation was passes. the supreme court doesn’t have the ability to enforce its rulings as parliament is sovereign, highlighting how the courts power is limited

31
Q

Belmarsh Case significance in against the supreme courts power

A

even though parliament acted on the judgement, the suspected terrorists had to remain in prison until legislation was passes. the supreme court doesn’t have the ability to enforce its rulings as parliament is sovereign, highlighting how the courts power is limited

32
Q

Treasury V Ahmed 2010

A

case regarded whether the treasury has reasonable grounds for suspecting that they ha links to terrorist organisation and if freezing the assets of the three suspected terrorists was ultra vires

33
Q

Treasury V Ahmed 2010 ruling

A

ruled 6-1 that treasury has acted ultra vires

34
Q

treasury v Ahmed 2010 significance

A

§gov extremely displeased with ruling and passed terrorist freezing act within just four days. therefore the courts power is limited as the government (with a large majority) can easily pass legislation to amend ruling, showing how parliament remains sovereign

35
Q

miller v sec of state for exiting EU 2019 context

A

weather the government needed parliaments consent to trigger article 50, as they arguably has a mandate from the referendum

36
Q

miller v sec of state for exiting eu 2019 ruling

A

SCOTUK upheld decision that parliaments consent was required to trigger article 50 as parl is sovereign

37
Q

miller v sec of state for exiting EU 2019 significance

A

slowed down the process of triggering article 50. its constitutional significance was that when treaties had been entered into the constitution by statute law, they can only be amended by the same mechanism

38
Q

UNISON context 2017

A

gov had bought in a fees order in 2013 where some of the cost of employment tribunals went to the person bringing the claims to court. meant that employment tribunals greatly decreased by 79% over 3 years and rights went undefended

39
Q

UNISON ruling 2017

A

SCOTUK ruled that the fees order was ultra vires as chancellor acted beyond the powers set out in statute law

40
Q

UNISON significance 2017

A

Raab said gov would stop fees and reimburse claimants (32 mil) court acted as a check on unlawful actions of the ministry of justice by using power of judicial review

41
Q

steinfield v home sec 2018 context

A

het couples couldn’t enter a civil partnership whilst gay ones could, argued this was discriminatory as gay people could now marry (same sex marriage act 2013)

42
Q

steinfield v home sec 2018 ruling

A

unanimously ruled current procedures were ultra vires, were originally valid but no longer

43
Q

steinfield v home sec 2018 significance

A

gov amended CPA to allow het couple to enter a civil partnership. SCOTUK recognised a deficiency in the law which was subsequently amended by the gov

44
Q

miller v pm 2019 context

A

whether if the PM had advised queen to prorogue parliament to prevent scrutiny, this would be ultra vires. and the length of time

45
Q

miller v pm ruling 2019

A

Johnsons prorogation of parliament had been unlawful

46
Q

miller v pm 2019 significance

A

showed SCOTUKs willingness to adjudicate on issues that fell fairly within the PMs royal prerogatives powers, and that fi then powers undermine the fundamental principle of democracy, they may be found ultra vires

UK Government (7 decks)

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