Conclusion: Judges as trouble-shooters

Parliamentary Affairs

Volumn 50, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 182-189

  Thompson, Brian ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030639594     PISSN: 00312290     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pa.a028712     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. 1 'Politicians and the Judiciary: a Changing Relationship', Parliamentary Affairs, 1995, 401; and 'Politicians and the Judges: A Conflict of Interest', Parliamentary Affairs, 1996, 423.
2. 1 'Politicians and the Judiciary: a Changing Relationship', Parliamentary Affairs, 1995, 401; and 'Politicians and the Judges: A Conflict of Interest', Parliamentary Affairs, 1996, 423.
3. 2 See A. Le Sueur 'The Judicial Review Debate', Government and Opposition, 1996, 31, 8, arguing that it is a political strategy to engage the judges.
4. 3 For three of his lectures see 'Ministerial Accountability' and 'The Acceptable and Unacceptable Use of Public Interest Immunity' both in Public Law, 1996, 410, 427; and 'The Use of Public Interest Immunity Claims in Criminal Cases' in the electronic law journal Web Journal of Current Legal Issues at 'http://www.ncl.ac.uk/'nlawww/1996/issue2/scptt2/html'.
5. 3 For three of his lectures see 'Ministerial Accountability' and 'The Acceptable and Unacceptable Use of Public Interest Immunity' both in Public Law, 1996, 410, 427; and 'The Use of Public Interest Immunity Claims in Criminal Cases' in the electronic law journal Web Journal of Current Legal Issues at 'http://www.ncl.ac.uk/'nlawww/1996/issue2/scptt2/html'.
6. 4 See R. Stevens, 'Judges, Politics and the Confusing Role of the Judiciary', The Hardwicke Building Lecture, 21 May 1996.
7. 5 See Stevens op. cit. who refers to lectures by Sir John Laws, 'Is the High Court the Guardian of Fundamental Constitutional Rights', Public Law, 1993, 59; and 'Law and Democracy' Public Law, 1995, 72 and by Lord Woolf , 'Droit Public - English Style', Public Law, 1995, 57. For an article by Lord Irvine in which he is concerned about developments in judicial review see 'Judges and Decision-Makers: The Theory and Practice of Wednesbury Review', Public Law, 1996, 59.
8. 5 See Stevens op. cit. who refers to lectures by Sir John Laws, 'Is the High Court the Guardian of Fundamental Constitutional Rights', Public Law, 1993, 59; and 'Law and Democracy' Public Law, 1995, 72 and by Lord Woolf , 'Droit Public - English Style', Public Law, 1995, 57. For an article by Lord Irvine in which he is concerned about developments in judicial review see 'Judges and Decision-Makers: The Theory and Practice of Wednesbury Review', Public Law, 1996, 59.
9. 5 See Stevens op. cit. who refers to lectures by Sir John Laws, 'Is the High Court the Guardian of Fundamental Constitutional Rights', Public Law, 1993, 59; and 'Law and Democracy' Public Law, 1995, 72 and by Lord Woolf , 'Droit Public - English Style', Public Law, 1995, 57. For an article by Lord Irvine in which he is concerned about developments in judicial review see 'Judges and Decision-Makers: The Theory and Practice of Wednesbury Review', Public Law, 1996, 59.
10. 5 See Stevens op. cit. who refers to lectures by Sir John Laws, 'Is the High Court the Guardian of Fundamental Constitutional Rights', Public Law, 1993, 59; and 'Law and Democracy' Public Law, 1995, 72 and by Lord Woolf , 'Droit Public - English Style', Public Law, 1995, 57. For an article by Lord Irvine in which he is concerned about developments in judicial review see 'Judges and Decision-Makers: The Theory and Practice of Wednesbury Review', Public Law, 1996, 59.