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

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll