User:Wyndham Freeman/Parliamentary Sovereignty in the United Kingdom
 | This is the sandbox page where you will draft your initial Wikipedia contribution.
If you're starting a new article, you can develop it here until it's ready to go live. If you're working on improvements to an existing article, copy only one section at a time of the article to this sandbox to work on, and be sure to use an edit summary linking to the article you copied from. Do not copy over the entire article. You can find additional instructions here. Remember to save your work regularly using the "Publish page" button. (It just means 'save'; it will still be in the sandbox.) You can add bold formatting to your additions to differentiate them from existing content. |
(1) So far as it is possible to do so, primary legislation and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights.
— Human Rights Act 1988, s. 3.
Section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 requires UK courts to practice "reading down" in order to apply national law consistently with the European Convention on Human Rights. "Reading down" is a practice in law, by which the judge first assumes that a law complies with the constitution, and thereafter finds an interpretation of the law which is "sufficiently narrow" so as to be constitutional [1][2]. It is usually practiced on laws which are written in extremely broad or all-encompassing ways [3][4]. The principle of reading down aims to preserve parliamentary sovereignty by minimizing conflicts between UK law and the ECHR, without allowing the courts to strike down primary legislation [5]. Legislation can be found to be incompatible, if reading down is impossible or would effectively change the legislation itself [6]. If legislation is found to be incompatible even after reading down, the court will issue a "declaration of incompatibility," which is non-binding upon parliament [7]. However, legislation declared incompatible is almost always amended by parliament [8].
- ^ "Reading down". Irwin Law. Retrieved 10 May 2024.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ "THE RULE OF LAW IN READING DOWN: GOOD LAW FOR THE 'BAD MAN'" (PDF). Melbourne University Law Review. Retrieved 10 May 2024.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ "Reading down". Irwin Law. Retrieved 10 May 2024.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ "THE RULE OF LAW IN READING DOWN: GOOD LAW FOR THE 'BAD MAN'" (PDF). Melbourne University Law Review. Retrieved 10 May 2024.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ Bradley, A W; Ewing, K D (2007). "Parliamentary Supremacy". Constitutional and Administrative Law. Pearson Education Limited. ISBN 978-1-4058-1207-8. p. 73.
- ^ Edwards, Richard A (2006). "Reading down legislation under the Human Rights Act". Legal Studies. 20 (3): 353–371. doi:10.1111/j.1748-121X.2000.tb00148.x.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) p. 357. - ^ Nussberger, Angelika (30 May 2020). "Implementation of the convention in different constitutional settings". The European Court of Human Rights (Elements of International Law). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0198849643. pp. 120-121.
- ^ "BURDEN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM". European Court of Human Rights. Retrieved 2 May 2024.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)