header-logo header-logo

Scottish independence: task assigned

08 July 2022
Issue: 7986 / Categories: Legal News , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail
The Supreme Court has been assigned the task of deciding whether the Scottish Parliament has authority to legislate for a consultative referendum on independence without the approval of Westminster

Under the provisions of the Scottish Independence Referendum Bill, Scots would be asked on 19 October 2023 whether or not they wish to remain in the UK. Authority to hold the 2014 independence referendum was temporarily devolved to the Scottish Parliament by then prime minister, David Cameron under s 30 of the Scotland Act 1998. 

However, Boris Johnson has stated he will refuse to grant s 30 authority for the referendum, pitting Westminster in a head-to-head conflict with Holyrood.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said she was therefore referring the issue to the Supreme Court to decide. Sturgeon said, if the court should decide the Scottish Parliament does not have that power, ‘what it will clarify is this: any notion of the UK as a voluntary union of nations is a fiction.

‘Any suggestion that the UK is a partnership of equals is false. There would be few stronger or more powerful arguments for independence than that.’

The Scottish National Party (SNP) would then fight the next General Election as a de facto referendum by campaigning on the sole issue of independence.

If the court hold the Bill is within Holyrood’s powers, then Sturgeon said her government would ‘immediately introduce’ the Bill.

The court acknowledged receipt last week of a reference by the Lord Advocate, Dorothy Bain QC, under para 34, Sched 6 to the Scotland Act 1998. The reference does not need to be granted permission for the case to proceed. Lord Reed, President of the Supreme Court, will now decide whether any preliminary matters need to be addressed, when the case will be heard and which Justices will sit on the bench. For more, see Marc Weller at p8.
Issue: 7986 / Categories: Legal News , Constitutional law
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Russell-Cooke—Susanna Heley

Russell-Cooke—Susanna Heley

Legal director appointment bolsters public and regulatory team

Slater Heelis—five appointments

Slater Heelis—five appointments

Firm appoints training partner and four new trainees

Bolt Burdon Kemp—Natasha Orr

Bolt Burdon Kemp—Natasha Orr

Firm strengthens military claims team with senior associate hire

NEWS
Government plans for offender ‘restriction zones’ risk creating ‘digital cages’ that blur punishment with surveillance, warns Henrietta Ronson, partner at Corker Binning, in this week's issue of NLJ
Louise Uphill, senior associate at Moore Barlow LLP, dissects the faltering rollout of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 in this week's NLJ
Judgments are ‘worthless without enforcement’, says HHJ Karen Walden-Smith, senior circuit judge and chair of the Civil Justice Council’s enforcement working group. In this week's NLJ, she breaks down the CJC’s April 2025 report, which identified systemic flaws and proposed 39 reforms, from modernising procedures to protecting vulnerable debtors
Writing in NLJ this week, Katherine Harding and Charlotte Finley of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court ruling that narrowed what counts as matrimonial property, and its potential impact upon claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
In this week's NLJ, Dr Jon Robins, editor of The Justice Gap and lecturer at Brighton University, reports on a campaign to posthumously exonerate Christine Keeler. 60 years after her perjury conviction, Keeler’s son Seymour Platt has petitioned the king to exercise the royal prerogative of mercy, arguing she was a victim of violence and moral hypocrisy, not deceit. Supported by Felicity Gerry KC, the dossier brands the conviction 'the ultimate in slut-shaming'
back-to-top-scroll