16 February 2022
A Profit that Creates Loss
The recent UK Supreme Court judgment of 2 February 2022 continues to exclude children from citizenship rights. The Court's decision is built on the idea that British citizenship is a statutory right rather than being based on common law or human rights law. As a consequence, the court's focus was on statutory interpretation instead of child welfare. The profit made from the children’s registration fees is at the expense of children who remain excluded from citizenship. Continue reading >>
0 
10 January 2022
A Missed Opportunity for LGBTQ Rights
A few days ago, the British activist Gareth Lee failed with his complaint before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The Court declared the application inadmissible as Lee had not claimed the violation of rights under the European Convention on Human Rights in any of the national court proceedings and thus had not exhausted all national remedies. Lee v. the United Kingdom really was a missed opportunity for Europe’s regional human rights court to address the issue of homophobia in the context of access to goods and services. Continue reading >>03 March 2021
A Paean to Judicial (Self) Restraint
The UK Supreme Court Shamima Begum decision is widely reported to be a win for former home secretary Sajid Javid who had stripped Begum of her citizenship. Yet, is it really a vindication of this action? The decision of the Supreme Court is not based on a factual assessment of Begum’s case but only on whether she has to be given permission to return to the UK to participate in an effective and fair manner in the immigration appeal. A limited decision, and by no means a final adjudication on Begum’s deprivation of citizenship case. Continue reading >>
0
11 December 2020
Corona Constitutional, Folge #52: Britische Verfassungskrise(n)
Das Brexit-Drama zwischen Brüssel und London zieht alle Blicke auf sich. Darüber übersieht man leicht den Streit über die verfassungsrechtlichen Grundpfeiler des Vereinigten Königreichs, der sich in den letzten Wochen und Monaten dramatisch zugespitzt hat – von der Rolle des Supreme Court bis zur "Devolution" in Schottland, Wales und Nordirland. Anlass genug für uns, über den aktuellen Zustand und die Entwicklung der ungeschriebenen britischen Verfassung zu sprechen. Wie hat hat sie sich im Laufe der letzten Jahre gewandelt, und ist sie den aktuellen Herausforderungen gewachsen? Darüber spricht Eva Neumann mit NICHOLAS BARBER, Professor für Verfassungsrecht und Verfassungstheorie an der Universität in Oxford. Continue reading >>
0
25 September 2019
A Constitutionally Momentous Judgment That Changes Practically Nothing?
The Supreme Court’s judgment in Cherry/Miller (No 2) that the prorogation of Parliament was unlawful, null and of no effect was a bold move as a matter of public law. It represents a constitutional court willing to assert its authority as guardian of the constitution. But although potentially of long-term constitutional moment, it changes very little with regard to the fundamental constitutional and political issue of Britain’s membership of the European Union. Continue reading >>
0
21 September 2019
Justiciable but not Necessarily Illegal
The UK Supreme Court is about to decide the fate of the UK Government’s decision to prorogue Parliament. Two are the main issues: First, justiciability – whether the Government’s decision can be subject to judicial scrutiny or whether it lies beyond the Judiciary’s remit. Second, if judicial review is available, whether the Government’s decision is lawful. Although the two issues prima facie appear to be distinct, in this case they are intertwined. I believe that the issue of prorogation in this case is justiciable and that the Government’s decision to prorogue falls within the legal boundaries of the Constitution. Continue reading >>03 February 2017
The Miller decision: Legal constitutionalism ends not with a bang, but a whimper
Miller was essentially a case which was argued before, and decided by, the court on the basis of the English Imperial constitutional tradition forged in the Victorian age. This judgment has made the political constitution of the devolved United Kingdom as a whole more unstable, more brittle, more fragile and more likely to break-up precisely because it denies the devolved nations’ institutions any legal right to participate in the Brexit process. Continue reading >>
0
24 January 2017
Brexit in the Supreme Court: An Opportunity Missed?
For all that this case has been written-up in the media as a ‘defeat’ for the government, this was a case in which the Supreme Court passed up a significant opportunity to compensate for the UK’s newly imbalanced constitutional framework. Continue reading >>24 January 2017
The Supreme Court in Miller – some early comments
The UK Supreme Court’s decision in the Miller appeal was probably greeted with a sigh of relief in 10 Downing Street. Sure, the Government will now need to seek parliamentary approval for triggering Article 50 TEU and starting the formal process of withdrawing from the EU, but the much greater political danger of having to also seek the consent of the devolved parliaments of Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales, has not materialised. What follows are a few brief comments on the Supreme Court’s reasoning and an assessment of its implications for the future. Continue reading >>
0
24 January 2017
Europarecht, Prärogative und Devolution: Der UK Supreme Court entscheidet über den Brexit
In seinem heutigen Urteil zum Brexit hat der britische Supreme Court entschieden, dass die britische Regierung nur nach gesetzlicher Ermächtigung den Austritt aus der EU erklären darf. Die Mehrheit des Gerichts sieht das Unionsrecht als eigene Rechtsquelle an, die nur das Parlament trocken legen kann. Dass es das nun tun wird, steht außer Frage. Continue reading >>
0