header-logo header-logo

10 June 2010 / David Burrows
Issue: 7421 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Impartial interpretation?

David Burrows breaks a self-imposed ordinance

When the French revolutionary National Constituent Assembly dissolved itself in 1791 it decreed a self-denying ordinance, that none of its members could sit in its successor body, the Legislative Assembly: a representative who had passed a constitutional law reform could not be its interpreter.

In R (Cart & Ors) v The Upper Tribunal & Ors [2009] EWHC 3052 (Admin), [2010] 1 All ER 908 Laws LJ makes a similar point (concerning the challenge of the finality of an Upper Tribunal decision): “The interpreter [of a statutory provision cannot generally be] the public body which has to administer the relevant law: for in that case the decision-makers would write their own laws. The interpreter must be impartial, independent both of the legislature and of the persons affected by the texts’ application, and authoritative—accepted as the last word, subject only to any appeal. Only a court can fulfil the role.”

The decision-maker must self-deny a role as “interpreter”, as distinct from enforcer, of a statute under which that decision-maker operates.

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll