|
You are here |
ukconstitutionallaw.org | ||
| | | | |
barristerblogger.com
|
|
| | | | | The vast majority of Conservative MPs are united in the belief that Parliament should be sovereign and the British Supreme Court should be supreme. Yet the Government has embarked on a plan which (... | |
| | | | |
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 | |
| | | | |
www.cyberleagle.com
|
|
| | | | | The government's Online Harms proposals, seeking to impose obligations on online intermediaries to suppress and inhibit some kinds of con... | |
| | | | |
ukconstitutionallaw.org
|
|
| | | This article suggests that the Supreme Court's interpretation of section 28(7) has created such problems in relation to the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament that the provision needs to be amended, repealed or qualified. Text The terms of section 28(7) appear innocuous. Section 28(1) confers power on the Scottish Parliament to make laws to... | ||