Constitutional Law Rulings

Bytoplawman
  1. R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (2017)
    • Law: Whether the government could invoke Article 50 without parliamentary consent.
    • Ruling: The court ruled that the government required an Act of Parliament to initiate the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.
  2. R (on the application of Miller and another) v Prime Minister (2019)
    • Law: Legality of the Prime Minister’s advice to the Queen to prorogue Parliament.
    • Ruling: Prorogation was deemed unlawful, an unjustified hindrance to Parliament’s ability to carry out its constitutional functions.
  3. R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor (2017)
    • Law: Validity of imposing fees for those bringing employment tribunal claims.
    • Ruling: Fees were ruled unlawful, as they prevented access to justice.
  4. R (Evans) v Attorney General (2015)
    • Law: The Attorney General’s veto over the release of Prince Charles’s letters.
    • Ruling: The court determined the veto was unlawful, leading to the letters’ publication.
  5. HS2 Action Alliance Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport (2014)
    • Law: Alignment of the High-Speed 2 railway plans with EU environmental protection legislation.
    • Ruling: Plans were not deemed incompatible with EU environmental laws.
  6. R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice (2014)
    • Law: UK’s law on assisted suicide and its compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights.
    • Ruling: The court declined to declare incompatibility, leaving the issue for Parliament.
  7. R (Cart) v Upper Tribunal (2011)
    • Law: Scope of judicial review concerning decisions made by the Upper Tribunal.
    • Ruling: Judicial review is available but restricted to cases of exceptional public importance.
  8. R (Gina Miller) v The Prime Minister (2019)
    • Law: Legality of Boris Johnson’s suspension of Parliament for five weeks amidst Brexit debates.
    • Ruling: Suspension (prorogation) was unlawful, as it hindered parliamentary scrutiny.
  9. Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (2013)
    • Law: Sanctions imposed on an Iranian bank by the UK Treasury due to nuclear proliferation concerns.
    • Ruling: The sanctions were disproportionate and therefore unlawful.
  10. R (Tigere) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills (2015)
  • Law: Eligibility of a Zambian woman, residing in the UK, for student loans based on her immigration status.
  • Ruling: The blanket ban denying her student loans was discriminatory and disproportionate.
  1. A v Home Secretary (2005)
  • Law: Detention of foreign terrorism suspects without trial under the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.
  • Ruling: Indefinite detention was disproportionate and discriminatory, thus incompatible with the ECHR.
  1. R (on the application of Black) v Secretary of State for Justice (2017)
  • Law: Providing civil partnerships to same-sex couples but not opposite-sex couples.
  • Ruling: Failure to allow opposite-sex couples access to civil partnerships was declared discriminatory.
  1. R (on the application of Catt) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (2015)
  • Law: Retention of data on a peaceful protester in the National Domestic Extremism Database.
  • Ruling: Data retention was excessive and a violation of Article 8 of the ECHR.
  1. Moohan v Lord Advocate (2014)
  • Law: Whether prisoners in Scotland should have the right to vote in the Scottish Independence Referendum.
  • Ruling: The court ruled that the prisoners did not have the right to vote in the referendum.
  1. R (on the application of SG and others) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (2015)
  • Law: Challenging the ‘benefit cap’ policy’s compatibility with Article 14 (non-discrimination) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the ECHR.
  • Ruling: The policy was lawful, even if it might affect some families adversely.
  1. In the matter of an application by Geraldine Finucane for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) (2019)
  • Law: Investigating the obligation related to the murder of Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane.
  • Ruling: Failure to provide a proper investigation into the murder breached Article 2 of the ECHR (right to life).
  1. R (on the application of Johnson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2016)
  • Law: Deportation of a young adult who had lived in the UK nearly all his life but hadn’t acquired citizenship.
  • Ruling: It was unlawful to automatically deport without considering the individual’s ties to the UK.
  1. R (on the application of Plantagenet Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Justice (2014)
  • Law: Burial location for the remains of King Richard III.
  • Ruling: The decision to bury the king in Leicester was lawful and did not require further public consultation.
  1. R (on the application of Wright) v Secretary of State for Health (2009)
  • Law: Inclusion of care workers in a list prohibiting them from working with vulnerable adults without prior notification or appeal.
  • Ruling: Such inclusion without the possibility of a fair hearing breached their rights under Article 6 of the ECHR (right to a fair trial).
  1. R (on the application of HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport (2014)
  • Law: The UK’s compliance with strategic environmental assessment obligations for the High-Speed 2 railway project.
  • Ruling: The UK had acted lawfully and fulfilled its obligations.
  1. R (on the application of Bancoult (No 2)) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (2008)
  • Law: The rights of Chagos Islanders to return to their homeland after being expelled in the 1970s.
  • Ruling: The court upheld the government’s order prohibiting the islanders from returning.
  1. R (on the application of Chester) v Secretary of State for Justice (2013)
  • Law: The rights of prisoners in the UK to vote.
  • Ruling: While the court recognized the incompatibility with the ECHR, it said it was up to Parliament to decide on the matter.
  1. R (on the application of Guardian News and Media Ltd) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court (2012)
  • Law: Media access to documents in extradition proceedings.
  • Ruling: The media should have access to ensure the principle of open justice.
  1. R (on the application of Ali) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2016)
  • Law: Deportation of foreign criminals and their right to a family life under Article 8 of the ECHR.
  • Ruling: Some foreign criminals can be deported even if it interferes with their right to a family life, based on the seriousness of their crimes.
  1. In the matter of an application by Siobhan McLaughlin for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) (2018)
  • Law: Widowed Parent’s Allowance and its inaccessibility to unmarried partners.
  • Ruling: The refusal was discriminatory and violated the ECHR.
  1. R (on the application of Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice (2011)
  • Law: Detention of individuals without charge or trial in Northern Ireland during the Troubles.
  • Ruling: Some detentions were ruled unlawful due to flaws in the interim custody order process.
  1. R (on the application of Faulkner) v Secretary of State for Justice (2013)
  • Law: Delays in parole hearings for prisoners serving indeterminate sentences.
  • Ruling: The delays were a breach of Article 5(4) of the ECHR (right to a speedy decision on lawfulness of detention).
  1. R (on the application of Hemming and others) v Westminster City Council (2015)
  • Law: Licensing fees for sex shops in Westminster.
  • Ruling: The licensing scheme was unlawful as it required payment of potentially refundable costs upfront.
  1. R (on the application of Moseley) v Haringey London Borough Council (2014)
  • Law: Consultation processes for changes to council tax.
  • Ruling: The local authority failed to provide sufficient information during consultation, making the process unfair.
  1. Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers (2015)
  • Law: Development of a wind farm off the Aberdeenshire coast near Donald Trump’s golf resort.
  • Ruling: The court refused the challenge against the wind farm, allowing its development to proceed.
  1. R (on the application of Nicklinson and another) v Ministry of Justice (2014)
  • Law: The issue of assisted suicide and the right to die.
  • Ruling: The court recognized the importance of the issue but stated that any change in the law should come from Parliament.
  1. R (on the application of Unison) v Lord Chancellor (2017)
  • Law: Challenge against employment tribunal fees on the grounds they were prohibitive and impeded access to justice.
  • Ruling: The court declared the fees regime unlawful and unconstitutional.
  1. R (on the application of Evans) v Attorney General (2015)
  • Law: Release of Prince Charles’ letters to ministers, and whether the Attorney General had acted lawfully in blocking their publication.
  • Ruling: The Attorney General’s decision was unlawful, leading to the release of the letters.
  1. In the matter of an application by JR38 for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) (2015)
  • Law: The right of a minor to anonymity in legal proceedings after being involved in riots.
  • Ruling: The child’s right to privacy was outweighed by the public interest in open justice.
  1. R (on the application of Tigere) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (2015)
  • Law: Eligibility criteria for student loans based on the residency, affecting individuals with discretionary leave to remain.
  • Ruling: The criteria were deemed discriminatory and a breach of the right to education.
  1. R (on the application of Miller and Dos Santos) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (2017)
  • Law: The government’s authority to trigger Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union without a vote in Parliament.
  • Ruling: The government could not initiate Brexit without an act of Parliament.
  1. R (on the application of P) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2019)
  • Law: The disclosure of minor criminal convictions on DBS checks.
  • Ruling: The scheme was disproportionate and incompatible with the right to private and family life under Article 8 of the ECHR.
  1. R (on the application of Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry and others v Advocate General for Scotland (2019)
  • Law: The prorogation of Parliament by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
  • Ruling: The court declared the prorogation unlawful as it had the effect of frustrating or preventing Parliament from carrying out its duties.
  1. R (on the application of Newby) v The Parole Board (2013)
  • Law: The role of the Parole Board in assessing tariffs for life prisoners.
  • Ruling: The Parole Board could evaluate and reduce tariffs set by the Secretary of State for certain life prisoners.
  1. R (on the application of Halligen) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2012)
  • Law: Extradition proceedings and the right to a fair trial.
  • Ruling: Extradition was permissible as there was no real risk of a breach of the individual’s right to a fair trial.
  1. R (on the application of A) v Secretary of State for Health (2017)
  • Law: Funding for abortion services for Northern Irish women in England.
  • Ruling: The government’s refusal to fund was not unlawful, but the policy was subsequently changed due to political pressure.
  1. R (on the application of L) v West London Mental Health NHS Trust (2014)
  • Law: Right to access personal data held by public authorities.
  • Ruling: The court upheld the patient’s right to access their medical records, aligning with the principles of transparency and fairness.
  1. R (on the application of Wright) v Secretary of State for Health (2009)
  • Law: Inclusion of care workers on a list barring them from working with vulnerable adults without the right of challenge.
  • Ruling: The procedure was deemed incompatible with the right to a fair hearing under Article 6 of the ECHR.
  1. AXA General Insurance Limited and others v Lord Advocate and others (2011)
  • Law: Challenge against the Scottish Parliament’s law to compensate sufferers of asbestos-related conditions.
  • Ruling: The court upheld the Scottish Parliament’s competence to pass the law, emphasizing devolution principles.
  1. R (on the application of Catt) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (2015)
  • Law: Retention of data of peaceful protestors by the police.
  • Ruling: The retention was ruled as a disproportionate interference with the right to private life under Article 8 of the ECHR.
  1. R (on the application of E) v JFS Governing Body (2009)
  • Law: Admission policies of a Jewish faith school and whether they were discriminatory.
  • Ruling: The school’s admissions policy was ruled to be racially discriminatory under the Race Relations Act 1976.
  1. R (on the application of Black) v Secretary of State for Justice (2017)
  • Law: The provision of pastoral assistance to prisoners who are atheists.
  • Ruling: The refusal to provide humanist pastoral support was deemed discriminatory.
  1. HS2 Action Alliance Ltd v The Secretary of State for Transport (2014)
  • Law: The proposed high-speed rail project (HS2) and its alignment with environmental and planning law.
  • Ruling: The court found the government’s decisions lawful and in line with European environmental law.
  1. R (on the application of the Public Law Project) v Lord Chancellor (2016)
  • Law: Proposed residence test for civil legal aid.
  • Ruling: The test was declared unlawful as it was discriminatory and outside the powers granted by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.
  1. R (on the application of H) v Mental Health Review Tribunal for the North and East London Region (2005)
  • Law: Detention of patients with mental disorders without a current medical report.
  • Ruling: Continuous detention without a recent medical assessment was a breach of Article 5 of the ECHR (right to liberty).

Similar Posts

14 Comments

  2. Thank you for your sharing. I am worried that I lack creative ideas. It is your article that makes me full of hope. Thank you. But, I have a question, can you help me?

  13. Thank you for your sharing. I am worried that I lack creative ideas. It is your article that makes me full of hope. Thank you. But, I have a question, can you help me?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *