R v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, ex p Lord Rees-Mogg  QB 552
Established the legality of the Government signing an international treaty which did not alter national laws, and thus did not impede upon Parliament’s sovereignty.
The claimant, Lord Rees-Mog, was a noted journalist and life peer of the House of Lords, who sought judicial review on the legality of the defendant’s signing of the Maastricht Treaty, which recognised Britain’s joining of the European Union. The claimant’s submission was that as Parliament was sovereign in Britain, it could not reduce or transfer certain powers (for instance regarding some social policies) without statutory authority, which Lord Rees-Mog did not believe had been satisfied as Parliament had not directly approved the Treaty’s signing.
Whether the signing of the Maastricht Treaty operated to illegally curtail the Crown’s prerogative.
The Court declined to give judicial review, finding that the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993 described a process for protocol ratification which Parliament had approved. Moreover, Lloyd LJ commented that ‘It is axiomatic that Parliament alone can change the law… treaty-making power is part of the Royal Prerogative’. Further, the content of the Treaty would not operate to alter the content of any domestic British laws, and thus the matter did not impact Parliament’s legislative sovereignty.
Further notable here is that the Court’s willingness to hear the case displays the adoption of a flexible and expansive understanding to lex loci in regards to judicial review, whereby a party who wishes to bring a claim ought be able to demonstrate sufficient standing of connection to the case.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
Related ServicesView all
Related ContentJurisdictions / Tags
Content relating to: "UK Law"
UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.
Clos Farming Estates Pty Ltd v Easton
Clos Farming owned several lots including Lot 86 that was situated on vineyard estate land....
Does Company Case-Law Illustrate a ‘Hands-Off’ Approach?
Professor Sealy: 'traditional unwillingness of the courts to undertake to review matters of commercial judgment or policy or of internal administration'...