header-logo header-logo

Court interventions by MPs: constitution in action, or under attack?

MPs' appearances before the courts are not just reserved for arguments about Brexit, say Ned Beale & Rebecca Lawrence 
  • There are very good reasons why MPs and all-party parliamentary groups would want to become involved in litigation, both by way of judicial review and interventions as to the interpretation of legislation.
  • However, there is a number of issues that MPs—and their lawyers—should bear in mind when considering an intervention.

Former Prime Minister Sir John Major’s warning in July that he would seek judicial review of any decision by the government to suspend Parliament to force a no-deal Brexit gave rise to a spate of Brexit-related cases. However, Brexit aside, recent cases—including a recent intervention by MPs in a Supreme Court hearing on a principle of company law—show MPs using judicial processes to influence government and legislation. This article discusses the Supreme Court intervention and other claims brought by MPs to explore legal and practical considerations around politicians' interventions in legal proceedings.

Background

The Supreme Court hearing of Sevilleja v Marex UKSC 2018/0178 in May

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll