Constitutional and Administrative Law Assignment Solution - UK Law

This assignment delves into the realm of constitutional and administrative law, specifically examining the impact of Brexit on parliamentary sovereignty in the United Kingdom. The solution analyzes the significance of the Miller case and its implications for the UK's departure from the European Union, highlighting how the courts affirmed the importance of parliamentary approval in the Brexit process. It discusses the role of Article 50 and the ensuing legal battles. The assignment also touches upon the evolving nature of parliamentary authority and the government's responsibilities post-Brexit. The solution provides a detailed examination of the legal framework and the shift in power dynamics. It also references key academic sources such as Grote (2020), Twomey (2019), and White (2020) to support its arguments.

Constitutional and
administrative law

Table of Contents
Brexit has really increased parliamentary sovereignty...............................................................1
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................2

Brexit has really increased parliamentary sovereignty
Yes, Brexit has really increases the parliamentary sovereignty because only parliament
can cancel the enactment and recede from EU, even government could not change the decision
by itself. As per the Miller Case, where Miller only draw attention to Article 50 of Treaty on
European Union which state that any individual may take away the steps from Union by their
own constitutional requirements (White, 2020). Whereas, Pannick argues that Parliamentary
sovereignty is a law demand and thus European Union did not accept the UK's decision, until
they have an approval from parliament. Hence, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the
European Union was also famed informally because Miller argued that decision is taken without
a consent from Parliament.
In addition to this, the case also reflected that government did not have any power once
UK leave the EU which is not acceptable by Miler and that is why, this case was hold in High
Court for sometime and as a result, decision were in favor of Miller where government has to
acquire authority from parliamentary to make changes in Article 50. As a result, High Court is
also agree with argument presented by Miller (Twomey, 2019). Even, the authorities of
government was not satisfied with the judgment and choose to went to Supreme Court but at last
parliamentary sovereignty is increases where they have a power to reverse the decision and that
is why, there is a need to proceed to be a key part of a procedure. Hence, after Brexit, Parliament
deliberate and represent the functions, along with an ability to hold executive who are accounts
fro defining features in UK (Grote, 2020).
1

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Grote, R., 2020. Brexit and Britain’s Changing Constitution. Max Planck Yearbook of United
Nations Law Online. 23(1). pp.400-417.
Twomey, A., 2019. Brexit, the Prerogative, the Courts and Article 9 of the Bill of
Rights. Sydney Law School Research Paper, (19/79).
White, S.G., 2020. The Referendum in the UK’s Constitution: From Parliamentary to Popular
Sovereignty?. Parliamentary Affairs.
2