How can the legislature force the executive to do something? Benn Act/Surrender Bill Watch

StormXibalba
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#1
Can anyone explain the legality of this Act? I realise that this is a law that has been passed in parliament but can the legislature make the executive do something? I.e can parliament force the PM to ask for an extension to EU withdrawal against his will? I'm not a lawyer but have studied law and I can't think of another example where this has occurred (I may be wrong). Do you think this may be something that could end up at the Supreme Court?
0
reply
Realisticism
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 weeks ago
#2
Why not?

If you've studied law, you should have come across statutes prescribing positive obligations on, amongst others, statutory bodies and Ministers. This is nothing new. In any event, duly passed Acts of Parliament are the supreme law of the land and cannot be called into question in any court, including the Supreme Court. This is taught in the very first lesson of law school. Unless you had studied law overseas, you really shouldn't be asking this question.
0
reply
yaseen1000
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 weeks ago
#3
What is the BENN ACT ( Surrender Bill according to Boris Johnson) and how will it affect Brexit ?

To find out watch the video below and remember to subscribe and share the video if you find it informative.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PrSvrXGUN3k
0
reply
Merridan
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 weeks ago
#4
I don't get it ether - I thought we had separation of Powers? I wonder what Americans think of this....
0
reply
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 weeks ago
#5
Yes, there are plenty of Acts of Parliament and statutory instruments that say things like "the Secretary of State shall" rather than "the Secretary of State may". That's essentially compelling the executive to act.

Arguably, the Crown - and by which, I mean the executive - could have blocked the legislation by refusing Royal Assent. But obviously that's not been done in three centuries. Although Queen's Consent, where a Bill requires the authorisation of the Crown to proceed when it deals with issues of the Royal Prerogative, has been refused in recent times.

(Original post by Merridan)
I don't get it ether - I thought we had separation of Powers? I wonder what Americans think of this....
Well, no - we don't. Quite the opposite. We have gradually separated out the judiciary, but it was only in the last two decades that we separated the courts from the legislature and, significantly, ended the role of the Lord Chancellor who used to be an official in the executive, the legislature and judiciary. Ultimately all three are fused in the Crown.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (65)
23.3%
No (214)
76.7%

Watched Threads

View All