header-logo header-logo

27 August 2019 / Michael Zander KC
Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Is proroguing of Parliament foul play?

Michael Zander reacts to the announcement that Parliament is to be prorogued on 10 September

There are two ways that a parliamentary session can be brought to an end—dissolution followed by a General Election or prorogation by the Crown. (“Just as Parliament can commence its deliberations only at the time appointed by the Queen, so it cannot continue them any longer than she pleases.” (Erskine May, 2019, p165))

Dissolution is controlled by the provisions of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 which provides that the period of a Parliament between general elections is five years unless  at least two-thirds of MPs vote for an earlier dissolution or the government loses a vote of confidence.

Erskine May defines a session as “the period of time between the meeting of a Parliament, whether after a prorogation or dissolution, and its prorogation” (2019, p164). The 2011 Act says nothing about the length of sessions.

Sessions are of an indeterminate length. Prior to the 2011 Act, sessions generally ran from October

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

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

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