Supreme Court Flashcards
Fusion of Powers
overlap between two or more branches
Example of Fusion of Powers
MPs can be executive
Law Lords before the creation of the SC in 2009
Issues with Fusion Of Powers
can be bias
undermines the extend we can hold the gov to account
What Acts Established The SC?
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 - moved it away from HL
The Supreme Court Act 2009 - created it
The Original Roles Of The Lord Chancellor
cabinet minister, supervise legal system (executive)
chairmen of sitting of the HL (legislative)
head of judiciary, appoints judges (judiciary)
Problems with the Original Roles Of The Lord Chancellor
too much power/ overlap
breaches the principle of separation of power
not democratic
Which Roles Were Taken From The Lord Chancellor?
chairmen of sitting of the HL (legislative)
- given to Lord Speaker
head of judiciary, appoints judges (judiciary)
- Independent Judicial Appointment Committee
The Aims Of The 2005 Reforms
bring greater transparency
bring UK in line with other modern democracies
end fusion of power
Main Roles of The SC?
hear appeals on arguable points of law that involve nation and constitutional issues
How To Become A Member of SC?
serve as senior judge for 2 years
lawyer for at least 15 years
Judicial Neutrality
make decisions without bias
Ways To Protect JN
Conflicts of Interest
- refuse to sit on cases with family/friend/ professional associate
Public Activities
- avoid politics = politically neutral
Judicial Independence
free from political interference
so they can judge on a conflict between state and citizen
Judicial Independence Maintained
Physical separation as SC is on Middlesex Guildhall while P on Westminster Square
Judge can’t be an MP
Salary determined by Senior Salaries Review Body and paid by Consolidated Fund
Act of Settlement 1701 - judged fired by both houses = tenure as unlikely to happen
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 - remove Law Lords, SC in 2009
Judicial Appointments Committee appoints instead of Lord Chancellor
Judicial Independence Not Maintained
Justice Secretary
can reject nominee
but only in exceptional circumstances
but still prevents full separation of power
Judicial Neutrality Maintained
case open to public
live streamed
Judicial Neutrality Not Maintained
elitist/ out of touch
drawn into major political disputes
- HRA/Brexit cases
Why Were The 3 Judges “Enemies Of The People”?
said gov would need Parliamentary consent to trigger Article 50 for Brexit as ref are not binding
already had referendum consent (52%)
delayed Brexit
+ Brexit is more legitimate as people and parliament wanted it
SC’s actions is an Act is in conflict with ECHR
determines if gov’s actions are according to law through judicial review
if unlawful then decision is quashed
declaration of incompatibility (Rwanda Safety Bill, Abu Qatada)
Ultra Vires
if a public body or gov had gone beyond their authority
Judicial Review +
professionals
separation of power can hold gov to account
appointed by IJAC
prevents tyranny of majority
does right over popular thing
Judicial Review -
unelected so shouldnt go against democratic democratic legitimacy of gov
no right to stop things that are popular or mandate
