Logo image
Judicial review, ouster clauses, and the democratic credentials of the judiciary in the United Kingdom
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Judicial review, ouster clauses, and the democratic credentials of the judiciary in the United Kingdom

Leah Trueblood
Legal studies (Society of Legal Scholars), Vol.45(2), pp.231-245
01/06/2025

Abstract

Government & Law Law Social Sciences
The aim of this paper is to challenge the argument that says, as judges are not elected, they have weaker or no democratic legitimacy when compared to legislators. This paper draws on dicta from Laws LJ, as he then was, in the Divisional Court case of Cart v Upper Tribunal, to offer two reasons why this is false. Call these the efficacy and equality principles of representation. The claim here is that without an independent judiciary, legislators cannot legislate or legislate in a way that applies equally. So, without an independent judiciary, the democratic legitimacy of a legislature is weakened or disappears. This argument makes a legal difference, but the kind of legal difference it makes varies between jurisdictions. This paper focuses on one difference the democratic legitimacy of judges makes in the UK: the extent to which Parliament can oust judicial review for error of jurisdiction.
url
https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2025.9View
Published (Version of record) Open

Metrics

1 Record Views

Details

Logo image

Usage Policy