what is the meaning of supremacy

Oh ffs this is a piece of piss!

Reply 2

Why yes.Una problema?

PS:If you knew what uni I go to now and look at the unis I am applying to you wouldn't say that...

Reply 3

I know,it's practically on the first few pages of Allen+Thompson.

God,some people.So lazy.

Reply 4

I don't get what the hell my dropping out has got to do with the fact the topic starter is too lazy to do his/her own work?!

Reply 5

I'm dropping out of law because my mother has cancer you tw@t and I want to go home and be with her for the rest of the year.

I am disgustingly miserable here and I think I have every right to drop out.

It's not that I'm thick or can't do it because I bloody well can so f*ck you.And if I want to go and do a Sociology degree I bloody well will despite your snobby views yes?

Reply 6

poltroon

Why did you post this? If a person on here posts a request for help, I would have thought it might be reasonable to help them. Rather, it seems, you wish to tease the original poster - probably frustrating him even more. If you posted on here seeking help how would you feel if someone posted in response the reply which you gave to the original poster of this thread?

Reply 7

Masta Killa

OP

i understand but please i would appreciate the help...

Reply 8

alocin

1

Googly googly - http://www.lawteacher.net/ELS/Law%20Making/Parlsoveriegn.htm

Parliament can do whatever it likes except bind itself into the future. At least in theory. Then the EU and Human Rights Act came along and muddied the waters. Who would the courts listen to if there was a conflict between the Terrorism Act and EU Law or the European Convention on Human Rights? The Human Rights Act 1998 and the ECJ or the Parliament of the day enacting the terrorism legislation?

Reply 9

litispendence

1

Surely Alocin, Parliament is still sovereign though. After all, it could repeal the Human Rights Act and enacting EU legislation (albeit unlikely).

Reply 10

alocin

1

LucyMP

Surely Alocin, Parliament is still sovereign though. After all, it could repeal the Human Rights Act and enacting EU legislation (albeit unlikely).

Yeah that's what you'd end up with as a conclusion, but you've got to argue boths sides a bit along the way! :wink:

Reply 11

Masta Killa

what would you say is the answer to this? the case of Dicey states that the Parliament has the right to make or unmake any law whatever

You're joking; right? Please tell me that you're taking the p*ss.

I might readily expand on what's been alluded to by Alocin and Lucy thus far: I could even supply apposite quotations; statutes, and case references; but I'm not going to. In fact, I move that no further indulgences be granted on your behalf; that you depart forthwith and resolve not to return until you can at least meet us half-way, as regards the fundamental tenets of the instant topic.

Have a nice tutorial, in any event.

Reply 12

Masta Killa

OP

Profesh

You're joking; right? Please tell me that you're taking the p*ss.

I might readily expand on what's been alluded to by Alocin and Katy thus far: I could even supply apposite quotations; statutes, and case references; but I'm not going to. In fact, I move that no further indulgences be granted on your behalf; that you depart forthwith and resolve not to return until you can at least meet us half-way as regards groundwork.

Have a nice tutorial.

if you dont wanna help dont post in my threads... do one... :mad:

Reply 13

alocin

Googly googly - http://www.lawteacher.net/ELS/Law%20Making/Parlsoveriegn.htm

Parliament can do whatever it likes except bind itself into the future. At least in theory. Then the EU and Human Rights Act came along and muddied the waters. Who would the courts listen to if there was a conflict between the Terrorism Act and EU Law or the European Convention on Human Rights? The Human Rights Act 1998 and the ECJ or the Parliament of the day enacting the terrorism legislation?

Actually, I do believe that it would be the European Court of Human Rights, if any; not the European Court of Justice. Furthermore, I doubt the waters have sufficiently 'muddied' to formulate a compelling argument on the strength of that proposition alone; a little refinement, though, and it'd be serviceable essay fodder.

Reply 14

Masta Killa

if you dont wanna help dont post in my threads... do one... :mad:

Thinking laterally, for one moment: how, exactly, does this qualify as 'help'? Is such 'help' not eclipsed rather by the fact that the onus with respect to delivery of knowledge and appropriating relevant expertise will, ultimately, rest solely on yourself? Do you even know why it is that you're taking a Law degree? Because, certainly, any reason is far from being self-evident.

By all means, one should request 'assistance' within reason; however, your seeming lack of basic knowledge, notwithstanding your apparently being utterly devoid of any initiative, at this stage of the course, combine to paint a dubious picture indeed.

Reply 15

The_Shyster

2

To an extent I agree with Profesh; really you should be using as many sources as possible to find the answer otherwise you will never develop a sound legal mind. However, he could have perhaps put it in a nicer way :wink:

Reply 16

Masta Killa

OP

^why you so annoying? just no need for your comments... if you dont want to contribute then just shut up please...

--------------

Masta Killa

^why you so annoying? just no need for your comments... if you dont want to contribute then just shut up please...

The_Shyster, that wasnt aimed at you

Reply 17

The_Shyster

2

ok, just checking :smile:

Reply 18