Essay On Parliamentary Sovereignty

Albert Venn Dicey stated that “The principle of parliamentary sovereignty means neither more nor less than this: namely that parliament […] has under the English constitution the right to make or unmake any law whatever; and further, that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having the right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament. […]

The principle of parliamentary sovereignty may, looked at from its positive side, be thus described: Any Act of Parliament, or any part of an Act of Parliament, which makes new law, or repeals or modifies an existing law, will be obeyed by the courts. The same principle, looked at from its negative side, may be thus stated: There is no person or body of persons who can, under the English constitution, make rules which override or derogate from an Act of Parliament, or

But that does not mean that it is beyond the power of Parliament to do such things. If Parliament chose to do any of them the courts could not hold the Act of Parliament invalid” (Madzimbamuto v Lardner-Burke (1969) – Lord Reid)

What the statute itself enacts cannot be unlawful, because what the statute says is itself the law, and the highest form of law that is known to this country. It is the law which prevails over every other form of law, and it is not for the court to say that a parliamentary enactment, the highest law in this country, is illegal.” (Cheney v Conn [1968])

ord Denning: "can anyone imagine that Parliament could or would reverse these laws and take away their independence? Most clearly not. Freedom, once given cannot be taken away" (Blackburn v AG (1971))

3) No body, including a court of law, can question the validity of an Act of