The Supreme Court Flashcards
What is The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
- The final court of appeal in the UK for all civil cases, and for criminal cases originating in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
- As the UK’s highest appellate court for these matters, it hears cases of the greatest public or constitutional importance affecting the whole population
History of the supreme court
- Established in October 2009 under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005
- Created as part of a push to strengthen the separation of powers in the UK constitution, by removing the judiciary (the Law Lords) from the upper house of the UK legislature (the House of Lords).
Constitutional Reform Act 2005
It abolished the position of the Lord Chancellor’s judicial functions, established the Supreme Court, and created a Judicial Appointments Commission.
There are several criteria set out by the law in order for a person to become eligible to sit on the Supreme Court. These are:
- held high judicial office for a period of at least 2 years,
- been a qualifying practitioner for a period of at least 15 years,
- satisfied the judicial-appointment eligibility condition on a 15-year basis, or
- been a qualifying practitioner for a period of at least 15 years.
Supreme Court justices do not have a term limit but must retire at 70 if appointed after 1995
Fusion of powers
Until 2005, the Lord Chancellor was a full fusion of all branches, being speaker in the House of Lords, a government minister heading the Lord Chancellor’s Department, and head of the judiciary.
Currently Lord Chancellor & Sec. of State for Justice is Shabana Mahmood
Supreme court devolution role
Has a special role in relation to the devolution statutes in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland: it adjudicates on devolution “issues” raised and “references” made under those statutes.
The Law Lords
Lords of Appeal in Ordinary
Judges appointed under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 to the British House of Lords, as a committee of the House, effectively to exercise the judicial functions of the House of Lords, which included acting as the highest appellate court for most domestic matters.
The different roles of the Supreme Court
- Uniformity in Legal Interpretation
- Finality in Legal Disputes
- Influence on Policy and Society
- Legal Precedent
- Accessibility and Justice
And … Human Rights Protection and Constitutional Role
The Supreme Court in enhancing Uniformity in Legal Interpretation:
The Supreme Court ensures consistency in the interpretation and application of the law across the different legal systems within the UK. This role is crucial for maintaining a cohesive legal framework, even though the UK comprises separate jurisdictions with distinct legal traditions and rules.
R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland
The Supreme Court’s role Finality in Legal Disputes:
As the final court of appeal, the Supreme Court provides the ultimate resolution of legal disputes. Its decisions are binding on all lower courts, which means it plays a crucial role in the development and clarification of the law. This finality helps ensure stability and predictability in the legal system.
Case: Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board (2015)
The Supreme Court role Influence on Policy and Society:
Through its judgments, the Supreme Court can influence public policy and societal norms. Its rulings on issues such as civil liberties, discrimination, and administrative law can have far-reaching impacts on how laws are understood and implemented.
R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor (2017)
Supreme Court role on Legal Precedent:
The Supreme Court’s decisions set precedents that lower courts must follow. This precedent-setting role helps to develop the common law and provides guidance to judges, lawyers, and citizens on the interpretation and application of the law.
Case: R v Jogee (2016)
Supreme Court role on Accessibility and Justice:
The Supreme Court serves as an accessible final forum for justice. It ensures that individuals and entities from any part of the UK can seek a final appeal in the highest court, promoting the idea of justice being available to all, regardless of regional legal differences.
R (on the application of Evans) v Attorney General (2015)
R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland
joint landmark constitutional law cases on the limits of the power of royal prerogative. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s advice to the Queen to prorogue Parliament for five weeks was unlawful. This decision demonstrated the Supreme Court’s role in ensuring that the actions of the UK government are consistent with the law across the entire UK. The ruling emphasized the principle that prorogation should not undermine the sovereignty of Parliament, maintaining legal uniformity and constitutional balance.
Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board (2015)
This landmark case involved a claim of medical negligence in Scotland. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Nadine Montgomery, establishing that doctors must ensure patients are aware of any risks involved in a proposed treatment. This decision provided finality and clarity on the issue of informed consent, impacting medical law across all UK jurisdictions.
R (on the application of Tigere) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (2015)
This case involved a Zambian student, Beaurish Tigere, who was denied access to a student loan due to her immigration status. The Supreme Court ruled that the blanket exclusion of certain groups from student loans was discriminatory and a breach of human rights. This judgment reinforced the protection of human rights across the UK, ensuring that policies are consistent with human rights principles.
R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor (2017)
The Supreme Court ruled that employment tribunal fees, introduced by the government, were unlawful because they prevented access to justice. This decision had a significant impact on public policy, leading to the abolition of these fees and ensuring that individuals across the UK could access employment tribunals without financial barriers.
R v Jogee (2016)
In this case, the Supreme Court changed the law on joint enterprise, ruling that mere foresight of a crime is not sufficient for a murder conviction. This decision set a new legal precedent, requiring evidence of intention to assist or encourage the crime, thereby refining the legal standards applied in criminal cases across all UK jurisdictions.
R (on the application of Evans) v Attorney General (2015)
This case involved the release of Prince Charles’ “black spider” memos. The Supreme Court ruled that the Attorney General could not override a judicial decision requiring the disclosure of the letters. This case emphasized the role of the Supreme Court in ensuring that justice is accessible and that government actions are transparent and accountable.
UK Supreme Court decision on Scottish Referendum November 2022
The Scottish parliament does not have the power to unilaterally call a second referendum on Scottish independence. The judgment comes in response to a request from the lord advocate Dorothy Bain (the senior law officer of the Scottish government) for a decision on whether a second vote could go ahead, following the first referendum in 2014.
The Christian Institute & Others v HM Advocate
28 July 2016
JUDGMENT GIVEN ON
The Supreme Court overrulled the Scottish Government’s named person service , as certain data sharing provisions were in breach of the right to respect for private and family life prescribed in **Article 8 **of the ECHR, meaning the Scottish Parliament must amend the Act in order for it to become law.
Supreem Court role in Common law
The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in defining and shaping common law, especially in areas where its meaning is unclear. When judges in the Supreme Court interpret common law and make a judgment on its application, their interpretation becomes binding precedent for all lower courts.
Supreme Court role in relation to Statute Law
In relation to statute law, the Supreme Court’s role is to interpret and apply legislative provisions enacted by Parliament. When disputes arise over the meaning or application of a statute, the Supreme Court provides authoritative interpretations that resolve ambiguities and clarify legislative intent. This interpretive function ensures that statutes are applied consistently across all courts in the UK.
Supreme Court role in relation to Case Law
The Supreme Court’s role in relation to case law is to serve as the highest appellate court, establishing binding precedents that lower courts must follow. Through its decisions, the Supreme Court interprets and refines legal principles, providing authoritative guidance on how laws should be applied in specific contexts. This process of precedent-setting, known as stare decisis, ensures consistency, predictability, and stability in the legal system. By resolving conflicts and ambiguities in case law, the Supreme Court helps to develop a coherent body of law that evolves with societal changes and new legal challenges. Its judgments on complex legal issues influence the direction of the law and ensure that judicial interpretations align with contemporary standards and values.
Supreme Court role in Judicial Review of Public Body Decisions:
The Supreme Court can conduct a judicial review of decisions made by public bodies, including government departments and local authorities. This process involves examining whether these bodies have acted within their legal powers and followed proper procedures. If a decision is found to be unlawful, the Court can quash it, ensuring that public bodies are held accountable and act in accordance with the law. Example: R (Miller) v The Prime Minister (2019)
Supreme Court’s role in Appeals on Grounds of Inequality:
The Supreme Court may hear appeals claiming that a decision of a lower court treated an individual unequally or unfairly. By addressing such claims, the Court ensures that justice is administered without discrimination and that all individuals are treated equally under the law. This upholds the principle of equality before the law and protects individuals from arbitrary or biased judicial decisions.
Supreme Court’s role in Asserting civil liberties
- The courts will normally consider three possible ‘proofs’
- Whether the ECHR has been breached
- The courts examine UK statute law, particularly the HRA to determine if there has been a breach of human rights; Declaration of incompatibility
- The Courts may consider whether the case involves issues covered by unwritten common law principles
Supreme Court composition
12 Judges, including a President, Deputy President and 10 Justices
- Pres currently Lord Reed
- Dept Pres currently Lord Hodge
- The President is not the most senior judge of the judiciary in England and Wales; the Lord Chief Justice is (currently xxx)
- There are always an odd number of justices on a case to ensure that a majority decision can be reached
The Presidents of the Supreme Court
- Lord Philips (2009 - 2012)
- Lord Neuberger (2012 - 2017)
- Lady Hale (2017 - 2020)
- Lord Reed (2020 - Incumbent)
All of their Alma Maters were Oxford or Cambridge
Deputy Presidents of the Supreme Court
- Lord Hope (2009 - 2013)
- Lady Hale (2013 - 2017)
- Lord Mance (2017 - 2018)
- Lord Reed (2018 - 2020)
- Lord Hodge (2020 - Incumbent)
f
Justices of the Supreme Court (beyond Pres + Dept Pres)
- Lord Lloyd-Jones
- Lord Briggs
- Lord Sales
- Lord Hamblen
- Lord Leggatt
- Lord Burrows
- Lord Stephens
- Lady Rose
- Lord Richards
- Lady Simler
The current salary for a Justice of the Supreme Court is £206,857
What happens when a vaccancy arisses in the Supreme Court
- The Lord Chancellor convenes an independent selection commission, consisting of the President, a senior court judge, and representatives of each judicial Appointments Commission for England & Wales, Scotland, and NI.
- The Lord Chancellor confirms or rejects the names put forward
- Judges are appointed by the British monarch on the advice of the prime minister, who receives recommendations from a selection commission.
Lord Chancellor is currently Shabana Mahmood
Judicial neutrality
- The expectation that Judges will exercise their functions without personal bias
- They apply and interpret the law in a neutral way
- Conflict of interest + Avoid any political activity
Supreme Court key operating principle; judicial neautrality
Conflict of interest
- A conflict of interest (COI) is a situation in which a person or organization is involved in multiple interests, financial or otherwise, and serving one interest could involve working against another.
- Judges must refuse to sit in on a case which might give rise to doubt about the Justice’s detachment
In what ways does the Supreme Court ensure transparency
(to enhance public trust and understanding of its operations and decisions)
- Public Hearings
- Live Streaming and Recordings
- Publication of Judgments
- Press Summaries
- Annual Reports and Publications
- Educational Outreach and Public Engagement
- Media Access
- Clear Procedures and Rules
What proportion of judges are ethnic minority
The proportion of judges who identify as being from an ethnic minority background has been slowly increasing, from 7% in 2014 to 10% in 2022
Proportion of black judges is 1%
What percentages of judges are women
As of 2023
Women make up 37% of court judges, and 54% of tribunal judges
Lay Hale on diversity in 2019
White and male UK judiciary ‘from another planet’
RADMACHER V GRANATINO (2010)
- Case invloving pre-nuptial agreement between married partners
- Ultimately, the court held that the prenuptial agreement was legally enforceable
- Upheld the principle that claims made in the event of a divorce should be limited
Judicial independence
- The principle that judges must be free from political interference
- Particularly important if they are called to administer justice in cases where there is a conflict between the state and an individual citizen
- Important for the idea of separation of powers
- Prevents executive and legislative encroachment
Alexander Hamilton on Independence of the Judiciary
In Federalist No. 78 (1788)
Of all the essays, No. 78 is the most cited by the justices of the United States Supreme Court
“The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution.”
What are the potential risks of a judiciary that is too independent?
Possible abuse of power by judges, influenced by self-interest, ideological dedication, and corruption without checks and balances.
How should the relationship between the judiciary and the executive be balanced?
It must be a complex series of dependencies and inter-dependencies that counter-check each other, avoiding excessive independence of one from the other.
Why is judicial support of the executive not necessarily negative?
Because the executive is the branch of government with the greatest claim to democratic legitimacy.
What is judicial accountability?
The duty of judges to explain and justify their decisions and make amendments where a decision causes injustice.
How does judicial accountability relate to judicial independence?
It can reinforce judicial independence by showing that judges have proper reasons and rationales for their decisions.
What balance should judges aim for?
Judges should aim to achieve equilibrium between accountability and independence to ensure that justice is upheld.
What historical act marked the beginning of judicial independence in England?
The Act of Settlement 1701.
(established tenure for judges unless Parliament removed them)
What are the two important conventions under the uncodified British Constitution that help preserve judicial independence?
- The UK Parliament does not comment on cases before the court.
- The principle of parliamentary privilege protects MPs from prosecution in certain circumstances.
How does the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 guarantee judicial independence?
It minimizes political interference in the judicial selection process and focuses on senior members of the judiciary rather than politicians.
What does Part 2 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 aim to achieve?
It aims to increase diversity among the judiciary.