Parliamentary Supremacy and the Re-Invigoration of Institutional Dialogue in the UK

• Autores: Fergal F. Davis
• Localización: Parliamentary affairs: A journal of representative politics, ISSN 0031-2290, Vol. 67, Nº 1, 2014, págs. 137-150
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • 2011 was bookended by two significant speeches on the relationship between Parliament and the judiciary. The first was delivered by Lord Neuberger, the Master of the Rolls; the second by Jonathan Sumption QC—in a final speech before being sworn in as a Justice of the UK Supreme Court. Both speeches were steeped in the traditions of the nineteenth century constitutional theorist, Albert Venn Dicey. Parliament was said to be supreme, although the possibility for dialogue between the courts and the legislature was acknowledged. Internationally such forms of ‘dialogic review’ have frequently been criticised for morphing into a kind of judicial monologue. However, this article will argue that the recent prisoner disenfranchisement debates demonstrate a renewed willingness on the part of the Parliament at Westminster to withstand judicial pressure.