Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
12 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What year did this case occur? |
2016 |
|
|
Who is the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union? |
David Davis |
|
|
What two relationships does this case illustrate? |
1) The relationship between the legislature and the executive 2) The relationship between the judiciary and the executive |
|
|
Who requested a judicial review? |
Gina Miller |
|
|
Why was a judicial review requested? |
She requested a judicial review of whether the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union had the prerogative powers to trigger article 50 |
|
|
What was her legal argument? |
Her legal argument was that parliament is sovereign and this stands above the claimed prerogative power to bring the UK out of the EU. |
|
|
What did the High Court rule? |
The High Court ruled that the government did not have such prerogative power and the sovereignty of parliament had to be exercised in this case. |
|
|
What constitutional realities did the Miller case illustrate regarding limits of government? |
The judiciary is to determine the limits of the government's prerogative powers |
|
|
What constitutional realities did the Miller case illustrate regarding rule of law? |
Rule of law is superior to political considerations |
|
|
What constitutional realities did the Miller case illustrate regarding referendums? |
Referendums are not legally binding and their outcome must be confirmed by the legislature, not the executive |
|
|
What constitutional realities did the Miller case illustrate regarding the legislature being sovereign? |
Parliament is sovereign over such matters in that the decision to leave leave the EU affects the rights of EU citizens so the executive must obtain legislature approval |
|
|
What affect does the UK leaving the EU have on EU citizens? |
Affects the rights of all EU citizens |
