• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Illustrating your answer with case law, assess the extent to which the exercise of the Royal Prerogative is controlled by the courts. Should the exercise of the royal prerogative be subject to more stringent control by parliament or the courts?

Extracts from this document...


Illustrating your answer with case law, assess the extent to which the exercise of the Royal Prerogative is controlled by the courts. Should the exercise of the royal prerogative be subject to more stringent control by parliament or the courts? In this essay I will be examining how far the Royal Prerogative is controlled by the courts after it has been exercised by the executive. I will then discuss whether the prerogative should be controlled by the courts or parliament, and how strict this should be. The royal prerogatives are powers and privileges recognized in common law as belonging to the Crown sometimes referred to as residuary discretionary powers. However, most prerogative acts are performed by the government of the day in the name of the crown. As by prerogative the Crown is immune from prosecution Certain prerogatives are only performed by the crown on the prime minister's advice, such as the dissolution of parliament. Some prerogatives such as powers to appoint and award honours are performed by the Crown, who will also conduct the relevant ceremonies, but decisions as to who will be honoured are made on the advice given by the government. ...read more.


The Police Act 1964 gave the police powers but, it did not exclude the home secretary using his prerogative powers, hence allowing them to uphold the supremacy of parliament. In R v Secretary of state for the Home department ex parte Fire brigades Union and others,5 the question arose; was the home secretary legally free to leave provisions unrepealed and exercise prerogative powers to establish a scheme radically different from those provisions? The court held that he could, but not too an extent that was so radical from what parliament had original approved of. Here the courts once again upheld statute over the prerogative. In R v Foreign secretary ex parte Everett 19896, the court held that the granting and withholding of passports was subject to review by courts. However, though courts are now generally allowed to review cases where prerogative powers are used, some exceptions do exist. In De Freitas v Benny7 it was held that the case was not susceptible for judicial review as courts have no control over prerogative of mercy. However, in the case of Bentley (1993)8, the court held that indeed the prerogative of mercy was a matter of policy, but there was a failure to recognise that the prerogative was capable of being exercised in the facts of the circumstances, and this failure was reviewable by the courts. ...read more.


It could be argued that parliament alone should have control of the prerogative as it exercises it and is the elected body. But, to have those who exercise it and then scrutinise it in such proximity may not give leeway to a legitimate analysis. Though question time, debates and select committees may allow for scrutiny, the government may argue national security overrides the discussion if it is a 'confidential' matter or even that it is in the public interest. Control of the prerogative by an independent institution from that who exercises the prerogative is crucial. Courts will take into consideration the issue of sovereignty of parliament by upholding statutes. Its perspective on the separation of powers will ensure that public policy matters are dealt with the government alone. However, the government will control the inherent executive powers, such as declarations of war and peace, and such powers may not be justiciable. Having said that, I believe that stringent control of the prerogative power be the equal responsibility of our constitution. As the UK has an unwritten constitution, the prerogative is as a result open to extensive interpretation. I believe certain prerogatives be sent to the reviewing institution-the judiciary. After all, the judiciary was appointed for the administration of justice. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Public Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

5 star(s)

A good essay; the student does as asked.

The student may have wished to have developed Dicey's theory throughout, to create a "theme" to the essay.

Marked by teacher Edward Smith 17/09/2013

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Public Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Parliamentary sovereignty. " Step, by step, gradually but surely, the English principle of the ...

    4 star(s)

    Evidence of this is present in the courts decision in the case of R v Secretary of state for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd5 where the The European Unions's (EU) Common Fisheries Policy set aside the Merchant Shipping Act 19886 .

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Essay on the function of Judicial Review

    4 star(s)

    There is a sliding scale of scrutiny which the courts use in deliberating unreasonableness: Non-Justicable, ordinary Wednesbury, Super Wednesbury and Anxious Scrutiny. Non-justicable cases tend to involve the executive (e.g. national security) and the judiciary is much less likely to intervene.

  1. the principles in the case of Ridge Vs Baldwin

    As Lord Wright said in General Medical Council v. Spackman6, "If the principles of natural justice are violated in respect of any decision, it is, indeed immaterial whether the same decision would have been arrived at in the absence of the departure from essential principles of justice.

  2. Compare and contrast written and unwritten constitutions. Which type of constitution do you favour?

    In contrast to the USA's written constitution the UK does not have judicial review of primary legislation, so any bills passed through parliament by the government are not previewed and cannot be declared unconstitutional before hand as they are in America.

  1. 'The House of Lords should be abolished. The UK only needs one chamber of ...

    Despite the strong argument for abolishing the House of Lords, there are many important factors supporting a contrasting conclusion. Namely, that the dissolution of the House of Lords would disrupt the system of 'checks and balances', the House of Lords is the only house that carries out expert, effective and

  2. Judicial review, as described by Lord Diplock, provides the means by which judicial control ...

    In this case, Flyinair was informed by a senior civil servant in the Department for Transport that it would not be subject to any sanction for using pilots whose licences had not yet been issued until the backlog was resolved.

  1. Critically analyse if the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms protect citizens(TM) ...

    student was not allowed to wear her traditional Muslim dress to school as it was against the school rules. The House of Lords ruled that this was not an infringement on her right to article 9. This decision had support from those who believed it was necessary, for example in

  2. Critically evaluate the ability of tribunals to deliver effective administrative justice.

    However, although theoretically tribunals are known to be able to provide quick, economical and fair resolutions to appeals in practice this might not always be the case. First of all, the ability of the tribunals to offer faster and more straightforward hearings may be overestimated and Fraser Youlson, the vice

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work