header-logo header-logo

Rogue prorogue?

12 September 2019 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7855 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Nicholas Dobson mulls recent Parliamentary shenanigans & wonders how the dice will fall in the Supreme Court

  • Traces the challenges to the prime minister’s prorogation decision in both Scotland and London.

‘What’s all this fuss about Parliament and The Pogues?’, some may have wondered. However, when on 28 August 2019 news broke that Parliament was to be prorogued (stood down for a specified period) by Order in Council (ie the Queen on advice of the Privy Council), it was nothing to do with the Celtic punk band. The kerfuffle was caused by the nature and context of the Parliamentary suspension ordered by Royal Prerogative. This is the inherent power of the Crown to act on matters for which Parliament has not legislated. Or as constitutional jurist, A V Dicey put it: ‘[T]he residue of discretionary or arbitrary authority, which at any given time is legally left in the hands of the Crown.’ So (per Dicey), the ‘prerogative is the name of the remaining portion of the Crown’s original authority’.

The Queen’s Order

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll