header-logo header-logo

17 November 2023 / Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC
Issue: 8049 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Conflict between government & judges is not new

146609
Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC looks back to the feud of Bacon & Coke

Francis Bacon and Edward Coke were the two legal giants of the late 16th and early 17th century. Both achieved high judicial office, Bacon as Lord Chancellor, Coke as Lord Chief Justice, but their views were diametrically opposed on the supremacy of the law and the authority of the Crown. Their conflict is the subject of a recent novel, The Winding Stair, by Jesse Norman, Conservative MP and former minister.

Coke was the legal scholar, wedded to the common law and the primacy of the judges. Bacon had a wider perspective. He favoured the monarchy, which at the time wielded executive authority. For him the judges were ‘lions under the throne’—powerful but subordinate. Parliament only attained its modern status after the ‘glorious revolution’ of 1689 reduced the Crown to a secondary and ultimately nominal role in government. With that difference the current tension between government and the judges parallels its precursor almost

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll