Parliamentary Supremacy - the question of whether membership of the EU has diminished the doctrine of Parliamentary supremacy, will be explored, with reference to legal authorities and academic opinion.

Authors Avatar

Constitutional & Administrative Law                36060

In the year of 1973, the United Kingdom became a member of the European Economic Community. Twenty years later, the UK signed the Treaty on European Union (or Maastricht Treaty) and became a member state of the European Union. Being a highly controversial and debated topic, the question of whether membership of the EU has diminished the doctrine of Parliamentary supremacy, will be explored, with reference to legal authorities and academic opinion.

Parliamentary supremacy is a key principle of the British constitution that is based on the concept that Parliament is the supreme maker of English legislation and has the power to make or unmake any law they see fit.  Whether these laws were morally or politically improper, did not matter as Parliamentary supremacy permitted Parliament to make such laws and they would still be held valid (Madzimbamuto).

The constitutional theorist A.V. Dicey had very strong views on Parliamentary sovereignty and described it as ‘the keystone of the law of the Constitution’. He believed that since the laws which were passed through Parliament were subject to intense scrutiny, it would be ensured that only good laws would make it through Parliament.  In effect, these laws made by Parliament were not restricted by neither content nor territorial region. This idea was utilised by Sir Ivor Jennings who gave the well-known example of Parliament passing an Act that banned smoking in the streets of Paris; provided the law was enacted in a force of Parliament, it would be held legally valid—however in reality, it would be ineffective and would be unenforceable.

Another key concept of parliamentary supremacy includes the idea that no Act of Parliament can be challenged by anyone other than Parliament. This was identified in cases such as R v Jordan, Pickin v British Railways Board and Jackson v AG which all held that no ‘body’ including the courts had the power to question the validity of any Act of Parliament. Lord Mustill, like Dicey, also had strict views on Parliamentary supremacy and stated that:

“It is the task of parliament and the executive in tandem, not of the courts, to govern the country.” 

Through the doctrine of implied repeal, it can be said that Parliament yet again has the upper hand, as it is held that Parliament cannot be bound by either its successors or its predecessors. The doctrine holds that an earlier Act is impliedly repealed or amended by a later, inconsistent Act. One of the predominant cases that illustrates this doctrine, is the case of Vauxhall Estates v Liverpool Corporation where Lord Avory held that the Acquisition of Land Act 1919 was impliedly repealed by the Housing Act 1925 and therefore he ‘would certainly hold, until the contrary were decided that no Act of Parliament can effectively provide that no future Act shall interfere with its provisions.

Join now!

Ultimately, it can be seen that Parliamentary supremacy is a key and highly significant element of the British constitution. However, many critics have argued that this supremacy was jeopardised and has now been diminished upon the UK becoming a member of the EU.  There are many truths that can be found in this statement as well as many misconceptions.

The EU is an international organisation consisting of twenty-seven member states. At first, the EU was governed by the Treaty of Rome 1957, but since the latest amendment—the Lisbon Treaty 2007—the EU is now a lot more simplified in terms of procedures ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

Avatar

An average essay on parliamentary sovereignty. The student may have wished to have included the fact that external bodies make UK law: see e.g. MacMahon v DES [1983] (EEC Treaty on free movement of workers was applied in preference to UK regulations, which prevented the claimant from obtaining an education grant) and Webb v EMO Air Cargo [1994]. Parliament is obliged to legislate to implement obligations arising from EU membership: see e.g. Marshall [1986]. An Act of Parliament incompatible with any requirement of EU law can and must be declared invalid: see e.g. Bossa v Nordsress Ltd [1998]. Conversely, EC law is limited to certain fields: trade, employment, agriculture etc., and has limited concern with criminal and family law, for instance. 4 Stars.