header-logo header-logo

Court interventions by MPs: constitution in action, or under attack?

MPs' appearances before the courts are not just reserved for arguments about Brexit, say Ned Beale & Rebecca Lawrence 
  • There are very good reasons why MPs and all-party parliamentary groups would want to become involved in litigation, both by way of judicial review and interventions as to the interpretation of legislation.
  • However, there is a number of issues that MPs—and their lawyers—should bear in mind when considering an intervention.

Former Prime Minister Sir John Major’s warning in July that he would seek judicial review of any decision by the government to suspend Parliament to force a no-deal Brexit gave rise to a spate of Brexit-related cases. However, Brexit aside, recent cases—including a recent intervention by MPs in a Supreme Court hearing on a principle of company law—show MPs using judicial processes to influence government and legislation. This article discusses the Supreme Court intervention and other claims brought by MPs to explore legal and practical considerations around politicians' interventions in legal proceedings.

Background

The Supreme Court hearing

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll