Constitutional Statutes

被引:27
作者
Ahmed, Farrah [1 ]
Perry, Adam [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Melbourne Law Sch, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[2] Univ Oxford, Fac Law, Oxford, England
[3] Univ Oxford, Brasenose Coll, Oxford, England
关键词
constitutional statutes; interpretation; conflicts; implied repeal; HS2; Thoburn;
D O I
10.1093/ojls/gqw030
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
In recent years, British courts have treated constitutional statutes differently from ordinary statutes. This article sets outs to explain: (i) how courts have treated constitutional statutes differently from ordinary statutes; (ii) what a constitutional statute is; and (iii) why constitutional statutes should be treated differently from ordinary statutes. Courts have made it harder for ordinary statutes to repeal constitutional statutes by implication, and easier for constitutional statutes to repeal ordinary statutes by implication. A constitutional statute is a statute which regulates state institutions, and which possesses importance of a particular type that we describe. The nature of a constitutional statute largely-but not entirely-justifies the special treatment they have been given. These conclusions have wider implications, including for proposals to codify the British constitution.
引用
收藏
页码:461 / 481
页数:21
相关论文
共 42 条
  • [1] THE QUASI-ENTRENCHMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL STATUTES
    Ahmed, Farrah
    Perry, Adam
    [J]. CAMBRIDGE LAW JOURNAL, 2014, 73 (03) : 514 - 535
  • [2] Allison JWF, 2007, ENGLISH HISTORICAL CONSTITUTION: CONTINUITY, CHANGE AND EUROPEAN EFFECTS, P1
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2008, PROBLEMA
  • [4] [Anonymous], 1947, THOUGHTS CONSTITUTIO
  • [5] [Anonymous], 1995, HALSBURYS LAWS ENGLA, V44
  • [6] Barber N, 2008, PL, P11
  • [7] Barber NW, 2008, PL, P12
  • [8] Blick A, 2012, CODIFYING NOT CODIFY, P80
  • [9] Bogdanor V, 2009, NEW BRIT CONSTITUTIO, P12
  • [10] Burrows JF, 1976, OTAGO L REV, V3, P601