/explore
|
You are here 
|
ukconstitutionallaw.org | ||
| | | | |
www.cyberleagle.com
The government's Online Harms proposals, seeking to impose obligations on online intermediaries to suppress and inhibit some kinds of con... |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
www.translegalproject.org
Download this article here:IntroductionThis articlecritically discusses the judgmentin For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16. I have tried where possible for itbe accessible to non-lawyers and to lawyers of all specialisms. The articleis not intended to be comprehensive in its critique of the judgment but focuseson three points:1. The implications of the Court declining to considerunder section 3(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998whether its interpretation would breach t |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
publiclawforeveryone.com
Earlier this week, the UK Supreme Court gave judgment in relation to the "Scottish Continuity Bill" [2018] UKSC 64. The matter reached the Court through a reference made under section 33(1) of the Scotland Act 1998, according to which the Court has jurisdiction to rule on "the question of whether a [Scottish] Bill or any... |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
lawandreligionuk.com
[AI summary] The article analyzes the Smith Commission's recommendations on Scottish devolution, specifically examining which religious and legal issues regarding equality, healthcare (abortion), and charity tax remain reserved or are proposed for transfer to the Scottish Parliament. |
|
| | | |||
