header-logo header-logo

Non-justiciability

20 June 2014
Issue: 7611 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Shergill and others v Khaira and others [2014] UKSC 33, [2014] All ER (D) 83 (Jun)

Non-justiciability referred to a case where an issue was said to be inherently unsuitable for judicial determination by reason only of its subject-matter. There were two categories. The first comprised cases where the issue in question was beyond the constitutional competence assigned to the courts under the separation of powers. The second category comprised claims or defences which were based neither on private legal rights or obligations, nor on reviewable matters of public law. The law treated unincorporated religious communities as voluntary associations. It viewed the constitution of a voluntary religious association as a civil contract as it did the contract of association of a secular body. The courts would not adjudicate on the decisions of an association’s governing bodies unless there was a question of infringement of a civil right or interest. However, disputes about doctrine or liturgy were non-justiciable if they did not as a consequence engage civil rights or interests or reviewable questions of public law. The governing bodies

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll