header-logo header-logo

Judicial independence: A warning from America

23 February 2024 / Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC
Issue: 8060 / Categories: Opinion , Public , Constitutional law , International
printer mail-detail
160023
Do we want a written constitution? Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC sees a problem

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom replaced the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords in 2009, as directed by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The Judicial Committee was an anomaly. It was the final court of appeal in the judicial system, yet—defying the axiomatic separation between legislators and judiciary—it was embedded in Parliament. The Supreme Court is now physically as well as constitutionally independent of the legislature. It is the ultimate arbiter of what is lawful but must obey legislation enacted by Parliament. In this it differs from the Supreme Court of the United States, which can nullify legislation and its effect by declaring it incompatible with the written US constitution.

We of course have never had any such overriding document. Recent investigations and proposals considered whether we should adopt one. They culminated in the government’s Bill of Rights Bill, recently abandoned following the departure from ministerial office of Dominic Raab

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: Mike Wilson, Blake Morgan

NLJ Career Profile: Mike Wilson, Blake Morgan

Mike Wilson, managing partner of Blake Morgan chair of the CBI’s South-East Council, reflects on his career the challenges that have defined him

Clarke Willmott—Alexandria Kittlety

Clarke Willmott—Alexandria Kittlety

Partner joins commercial property team in Birmingham

Birketts—Will MacFarlane & Sarah Dodds

Birketts—Will MacFarlane & Sarah Dodds

Family team expands with double appointment in Bristol office

NEWS
Lawyers have expressed dismay at the Chancellor Rachel Reeve’s decision to impose a £2,000 cap on salary sacrifice contributions
NLJ is inviting its readers to take part in this year’s annual reader research, a short survey designed to help shape the future direction of the magazine. The questionnaire consists of just eight quick questions and offers an opportunity for legal professionals to share their views on the content, coverage and issues that matter most to them.
The Law Society has urged regulators not to ban the term ‘no win no fee’, as the profession contemplates measures to prevent a disaster like the SSB Group collapse from happening again
The legal profession's leaders have mounted a robust defence of trial by jury, following reports that Justice Secretary David Lammy is considering restricting it to rape, murder, manslaughter and other cases that are in the public interest
CILEX (the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives) has been granted permission to appeal Mazur, a decision which has caused consternation among litigation firms
back-to-top-scroll