Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-20T21:54:15.283Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Lecture III - The Common Law and Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2014

John Laws
Affiliation:
Court of Appeal
Get access

Summary

‘But when we come to matters with a European element, the Treaty is like an incoming tide. It flows into the estuaries and up the rivers. It cannot be held back. Parliament has decreed that the Treaty is henceforward to be part of our law. It is equal in force to any statute.’ This was Lord Denning’s metaphor for the arrival in our books of Community law. The citation is from Bulmer v. Bollinger, a celebrated case at the time. It was about the protection of the designation ‘champagne’ under what is of course now EU law. Judgment was delivered only sixteen months after the United Kingdom acceded to what was then known as the Common Market in January 1973.

In Lecture I, I described the constitutional balance between law and government, between judicial and political power. The constitutional balance has evolved through the benign force of our constitution’s unifying principle, the common law. The common law’s distinctive method has yielded a process of continuous self-correction, allowing for the refinement of principle over time; it is the crucible of the moderate and orderly development of state power. This benign continuum of developing law has been the means by which legislature and government are allowed efficacy but forbidden oppression. But I also said that there were two contemporary threats to the constitutional balance. The first is produced by present-day fears, both real and imagined, of the malice of extremism. That was the subject of Lecture II. The second threat is the subject of this Lecture. It is that the actual or perceived effects of law made in Europe upon our domestic system may undermine virtues of the common law: its catholicity and its restraint. Lord Denning’s metaphor about the estuaries and the rivers, whether or not he meant it so, thus has a whiff of apprehension about it. It may serve as a very superficial shorthand for the concerns I will expose and confront.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ex parte Hargreaves [1997] 1 WLR 906
Ex parte Coughlan [1999] COD 340
Usher, J., ‘The Influence of National Concepts on Decisions of the European Court’ (1976) 1 European Law Review359, 364Google Scholar
EC Commission v. EC Council [1973] ECR 575
Pandey, B. N.’s article, ‘Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation’ (2002) 31 Ban. LJ57Google Scholar
Forsyth, C. F. [1988] CLJ238
Forsyth, , quoted at [1988] CLJ238, 241
Hunt, Murray, ‘The Emergence of a Common Law Human Rights Jurisdiction’, ch. 5 in Using Human Rights Law in English Courts (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 1997)
Douglas and another v. Hello! Ltd [2001] QB 967
Kipling, Rudyard, The English Flag (1891)
Hart, H. L. A., The Concept of Law (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1961
Thoburn [2003] QB 151, para. 39
Feldman, David, ‘The Nature and Significance of “Constitutional” Legislation’ (2013) 129 LQR343.Google Scholar
Thoburn [2003] QB 151, para. 63
Wade, H. W. R. and Forsyth, C. F., Administrative Law (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 2000)
Thoburn [2003] QB 151, para. 60
Ex parte Witham [1998] 2 WLR 849
Ex parte Pierson [1998] AC 539, 575C–D
Ex parte Simms [2000] 2 AC 115
Thoburn [2003] QB 151, para. 69
Straw, Jack, ‘The Human Rights Act and Europe’, ch. 2 in Aspects of Law Reform: An Insider’s Perspective, Hamlyn Lectures 2012 (Cambridge University Press, 2013)
Sales, Philip published a reply: ‘Strasbourg Jurisprudence and the Human Rights Act: A Response to Lord Irvine’ (2012) PL253Google Scholar
Brown, Lord in Al-Skeini [2007] UKHL 26
R v. Horncastle [2010] 2 AC 373
Manchester City Council v. Pinnock [2011] 2 AC 104, para. 48
Osborn [2013] UKSC 61, paras. 56–7
Chester [2013] UKSC 63, para. 27
Garland v. British Rail Engineering [1983] 2 AC 751

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×