Transcripts (perhaps draft) of the Article 50 ‘Brexit’ Appeal hearings at the Supreme Court

Precisely because it is not the law of the land in that sense; that is in truth coming close to the Finniss/Millett analysis, if I can put it that way without disrespect in adding titles, but also to illustrate a basic truth, which is that Parliament has intervened. And so you have the mechanism set up in the 1972 Act, you have the various forms of legislative control, so it goes to both of those things.

The reason that I introduced the Dangerous Dogs Act and my learned friend Lord Pannick introduced the Dangerous Dogs Act into the debate was to draw the distinction between parliamentary intervention, as it were, which creates a situation under which international acts by Government in the exercise of prerogative powers flow back into domestic law, and the Dangerous Dogs Act which has nothing of that form of parliamentary intervention about it.

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech