Using numerous topical examples and a clear structure, this third edition textbook provides an accessible, discursive and scholarly treatment of the key contemporary issues in UK public law. Drawing upon their extensive teaching and research experience, Roger Masterman and Colin Murray offer an engaging account of the key topics which make up a constitutional and administrative, or public, law syllabus. Controversial issues and broader debates are highlighted throughout the text, allowing the reader to develop a strong understanding of both the application of key topics in the field and the socio-political context in which the constitution has developed. This fully revised edition includes detailed analysis of recent significant cases, the constitutional implications of the Covid-19 pandemic and a dedicated chapter on the consequences of Brexit.

Judicial Reasoning under the UK Human Rights Act is a collection of essays written by leading experts in the field, which examines judicial decision-making under the UK's de facto Bill of Rights. The book focuses both on changes in areas of substantive law and the techniques of judicial reasoning adopted to implement the Act. The contributors therefore consider first general Convention and Human Rights Act concepts - statutory interpretation, horizontal effect, judicial review, deference, the reception of Strasbourg case-law - since they arise across all areas of substantive law. They then proceed to examine not only the use of such concepts in particular fields of law (privacy, family law, clashing rights, discrimination and criminal procedure), but also the modes of reasoning by which judges seek to bridge the divide between familiar common law and statutory doctrines and those in the Convention.

More than five years after the commencement of the Human Rights Act 1998, it is timely to evaluate the Act's effectiveness. The focus of Making Rights Real is on the extent to which the Act has delivered on the promise to 'bring rights home'. To that end the book considers how the judiciary, parliament and the executive have performed in the new roles that the Human Rights Act requires them to play and the courts' application of the Act in different legal spheres. This account cuts through the rhetoric and controversy surrounding the Act, generated by its champions and detractors alike, to reach a measured assessment. The true impact in public law, civil law, criminal law and on anti-terrorism legislation are each considered. Finally, the book discusses whether we are now nearer to a new constitutional settlement and to the promised new 'rights culture'.

Judicial Reasoning under the UK Human Rights Act is a collection of essays written by leading experts in the field, which examines judicial decision-making under the UK??'s de facto Bill of Rights. The book focuses both on changes in areas of substantive law and the techniques of judicial reasoning adopted to implement the Act. The contributors therefore consider first general Convention and Human Rights Act concepts ??? statutory interpretation, horizontal effect, judicial review, deference, the reception of Strasbourg case-law ??? since they arise across all areas of substantive law. They then proceed to examine, not only the use of such concepts in particular fields of law (privacy, family law, clashing rights, discrimination and criminal procedure), but also the modes of reasoning by which judges seek to bridge the divide between familiar common law and statutory doctrines and those in the Convention.

What is the purpose of comparative constitutional law? Comparing constitutions allows us to consider the similarities and differences in forms of government, and the normative philosophies behind constitutional choices. Constitutional comparisons offer 'hermeneutic' help: they enable us to see 'our' own constitution with different eyes and to locate its structural and normative choices by references to alternatives evident in other constitutional orders. This Cambridge Companion presents readers with a succinct yet wide-ranging companion to a modern comparative constitutional law course, offering a wide-ranging yet concise introduction to the subject. Its twenty-two chapters are arranged into five thematic parts: starting with an exploration of the 'theoretical foundations' (Part I) and some important 'historical experiences' (Part II), it moves on to a discussion of the core 'constitutional principles' (Part III) and 'state institutions' (Part IV); finally it analyses forms of 'transnational' constitutionalism (Part V) that have emerged in our 'global' times.

This book examines the dividing lines between the powers of the judicial branch of government and those of the executive and legislative branches in the light of two of the most significant constitutional reforms of recent years: the Human Rights Act 1998 and Constitutional Reform Act 2005. Both statutes have implications for the separation of powers within the United Kingdom constitution. The Human Rights Act brings the judges into much closer proximity with the decisions of political actors than previously permitted by the Wednesbury standard of review and the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. While, arguably by contrast, the Constitutional Reform Act marks the emergence of an institutionally independent judicial branch. Taken together, the two legislative schemes form the backbone of a more comprehensive system of constitutional checks and balances policed by a judicial branch underpinned by the legitimacy of institutional independence. For law and politics readers on constitutional reform globally.

What is the purpose of comparative constitutional law? Comparing constitutions allows us to consider the similarities and differences in forms of government, and the normative philosophies behind constitutional choices. Constitutional comparisons offer 'hermeneutic' help: they enable us to see 'our' own constitution with different eyes and to locate its structural and normative choices by references to alternatives evident in other constitutional orders. This Cambridge Companion presents readers with a succinct yet wide-ranging companion to a modern comparative constitutional law course, offering a wide-ranging yet concise introduction to the subject. Its twenty-two chapters are arranged into five thematic parts: starting with an exploration of the 'theoretical foundations' (Part I) and some important 'historical experiences' (Part II), it moves on to a discussion of the core 'constitutional principles' (Part III) and 'state institutions' (Part IV); finally it analyses forms of 'transnational' constitutionalism (Part V) that have emerged in our 'global' times.