,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Short thread replying to a point made by Lord Keen
He argued for HMG that the Inner House of the Court of Sessions’ (Scotland’s court of appeal) various rulings that the prorogation was ‘illegitimate’ or ‘improper’ etc. entailed a corresponding requirement to say ... 1/5
He argued for HMG that the Inner House of the Court of Sessions’ (Scotland’s court of appeal) various rulings that the prorogation was ‘illegitimate’ or ‘improper’ etc. entailed a corresponding requirement to say ... 1/5
2/5 .. what would be legitimate or proper, in other words to codify the law of prorogation and that, as this could not be done, the ruling was flawed.
But this is not necessarily how the common law works. The law can develop from modest beginnings on a case by case ..
But this is not necessarily how the common law works. The law can develop from modest beginnings on a case by case ..
3/5 .. basis without being fully formulated in a comprehensive code at the outset. The laws of negligence, judicial review & restitution all derive from 20th century case law originally and all have been massively refined over decades by successive judicial decisions ..
4/5 .. So it seems to me perfectly legitimate, even normal, for the SC to say the government’s conduct was unlawful without having to develop a complete code for use & reference by future generations.
It is a form of inductive reasoning, which the courts have ..
It is a form of inductive reasoning, which the courts have ..
5/5 .. historically used to develop new principles to deal with new situations, as this most certainly is.
