The judiciary Flashcards
what is the Supreme Court
- Comprises 12 justices
- final court of appeal for England, Wales and Northern Ireland
- Hears civil appeals from Scotland
what was the highest court of appeal before the supreme court was established in 2009
The 12 Law Lords would sit in the Appellate Committe of the House of Lords.
what was the Constitutional Reform Act 2005
- introduced the supreme court
- abolished the lord chancellors judicial role
- removed appointment powers from the lord chancellor and gave them to Judicial Appointments Commission
- established more judicial independence
What is the role of the Supreme Court in the UK constitution?
- Acts as a constitutional court by ruling on the compatibility of laws with the HRA 1998
- determines whether public legal bodies have acted ultra vires (beyond legal powers)
- resolves disputes over devolved powers (Scotland act 1998 cases)
Why is the Judicial appointments commission significant?
- greater transparency and legitimacy to the process by which most senior judges are appointed
- ensures merit based appointments
- reduces political bias
- acts as a check on executive influence
Does the Supreme Court represent the UK population?
- Lack of Diversity: 2024 only 2 out of 12 justices were women; very few from ethnic minority backgrounds.
- Most come from elite universities (e.g., Oxford, Cambridge) and privileged legal careers.
- Non-democratic: justices are appointed, not elected.
Separation of powers
- The legislature legislates (i.e. makes the laws).
- The executive branch has the role of executing policy (i.e. putting laws into effect).
- The judiciary is charged with the task of enforcing and interpreting the laws.
Why was the UK supreme court established?
- concerns over incomplete separation of powers
- widespread criticism of how Law Lords were appointed
- public confusion over the role of the lords
Three key functions performed by the UK Supreme Court
- judicial review: review laws and government actions
- final court of appeal: makes ultimate rulings on legal matters
- Clarify the meaning of the law in cases with uncertainty
what is Judicial independence
The principle that judges must be free from political influence to apply justice fairly.
what is judicial impartiality
Judges must apply the law using law and facts of the case without bias, prejudice, or external influence.
how is judicial independence upheld?
- Security of tenure: Judges remain in office until 75, removal requires a vote in both Houses of Parliament.
- Guaranteed salaries: Paid automatically from the Consolidated Fund, shielding judges from political pressure
- Contempt of court – The sub judice rule prevents media and ministers from commenting on ongoing cases.
- An independent appointments system – Prevents political interference in judge selection.
How is judicial impartiality guaranteed?
- Anonymity – Judges rarely engage in public debates on law
- Political activity restrictions: Judges cannot campaign for parties but can vote.
- Legal reasoning transparency – Senior judges must justify their rulings in written judgments.
How does the judiciary influence government decision-making?
- judicial review: challenges unlawful government actions
- Precedent-setting: Court rulings can set legal precedents, guiding future government actions and decisions.
- Devolution rulings: defines the powers of the devolved governments
- Courts protect individual rights by reviewing government policies and laws that may violate rights. e.g. ECHR
what is judicial review
The process by which judges review the actions of public officials or public bodies in order to determine whether or not they have acted in a manner that is lawful.
what is the importance of judicial review
- ensuring rule of law
- protecting individual rights
- checks and balances
What is an example of judicial review?
- The Prorogation of Parliament case (2019): supreme court ruled that BJ’s advice to the Queen to suspend parliament was unlawful, forcing him to recall parliament
What are some notable supreme court cases?
- Miller v Secretary of sate for exiting the EU (2017): ruled that Parliament must approve Brexit
- Miller v Prime Minister (2019: Ruled that BJ’s prorogation of parliament was unlawful
what are some points for the UK judiciary become more politicised in recent years?
- The Human Rights Act 1998 required judges to rule on the ‘merit’ of an individual piece of statute law as opposed to its ‘application’.
- Increasing Use of Judicial Review in Political Decisions: courts are now more frequently reviewing decisions made by the government, especially in politically sensitive areas. e.g. Miller case (2017)
- Politician’s have criticised judicial rulings (e.g. Daily Mail’s ‘Enemies of the People’ headline)
what are some points against the UK judiciary become more politicised in recent years
- The creation of the JAC has helped independence
- Security of tenure and salaries blocks political pressure
- The court cannot strike down acts of parliament due to parliamentary sovereignty meaning that the judiciary focuses more on the application of the law rather than political power, and cannot engage in actions that might be seen as politically motivated
what are some points supporting the argument that the UK judiciary had a greater impact on the work of the executive and parliament in recent years?
- limit power of the executive: e.g.R (Miller) v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (2017), the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not trigger Article 50 without parliamentary approval
- The Human Rights Act 1998: empowered the judiciary to hold the government accountable for violations of individual rights
- can determine if acts by parliament are unconstitutional e.g. Miller v Prime Minister 2019
what are some points against the argument that the UK judiciary had a greater impact on the work of the executive and parliament in recent years?
- Parliament remains sovereignty: Judges cannot strike down primary legislation.
- Limited judicial review: Courts review legality, not political decisions
- Select committees and MPs influence government policy more directly than judges.
what is the impact of leaving the EU on the Supreme Court
- The court will no longer be bound by EU law
- Less judicial independence over government decisions
- Supreme court is now the final legal authority
How does the judiciary protect human rights in the UK?
- Judicial review: challenge laws or gov actions that are deemed incompatible with the ECHR e.g. Hirst v UK 2005, a ruling that led to the issue of the prisoner voting rights
- Protection of Fundamental Rights: Judges ensure that gov respects rights such as right to a fair trial, right to life, prohibition of torture
