J Evans, 'Questioning the Dogmas of Realism' [2001] New Zealand Law Review 145.
[2000] AC 115, 131.
Kalderimis, above n 5, 371.
Ibid.
Compare J Palmer, 'Elias in Wonderland' (2001) 9 Auckland Univeristy Law Review 594, 604.
The long title of the CJAA declares it to be 'An Act to amend the Criminal Justice Act 1985'.
Joseph, 'Constitutional Law', above n 135, 455.
For an overview of the German Constitution, see N Foster, German Legal System & Laws (2nd ed, 1996) 140.
For the position in Australia, see A R Blackshield and G Williams, Australian Constitutional Law and Theory: Commentary and Materials (2nd ed, 1998); for the position in Canada, see P W Hogg, Constitutional Law in Canada (4th ed, 1997).
For a recent examination of the constitutional status of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty in the United Kingdom, see J L Black Branch, 'Parliamentary Supremacy or Political Expediency? The Constitutional Position of the Human Rights Act under British Law' (2002) 23 Statute Law Review 59.
Dicey, above n 2, 40.
Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal SpA (No 2) [1978] 3 CMLR 263.
Ibid 268.
The European Communities Act 1972 s 2(1) provides: 'All such rights, powers, liabilities, obligations and restrictions from time to time created or arising by or under the Treaties, and all such remedies and procedures from time to time provided for by or under the Treaties, as in accordance with the Treaties are without further enactment to be given legal effect or used in the United Kingdom shall be recognised and available in law, and be enforced, allowed and followed accordingly; and the expression 'enforceable Community right' and similar expressions shall be read as referring to one to which this subsection applies'.
A Page, 'The Constitutional Background' in P Giddings and G Drewry (eds), Westminster and Europe: The Impact of the European Union on the Westminster Parliament (1996) 31, 44-5.
Section 2(4) provides that: 'The provisions that may be made under section 2(2) include, subject to Schedule 2, any such provision (of any such extent) as might be made by Act of Parliament, and any enactment passed or to be passed ... shall be construed and have effect subject to the foregoing provisions of this section ...'.
See Macarthys Ltd v Smith [1979] 3 All ER 325; Garland v British Rail Engineering Ltd [1983] 2 AC 751; Pickstone v Freemans plc [1989] AC 66.
[1990] 2 AC 85; R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd (No 2) [1991] 1 AC 603; for a discussion of the relevance of the decisions for New Zealand see B V Harris, 'Parliamentary Sovereignty and Interim Injunctions: Factortame and New Zealand' (1992) 15 New Zealand Universities Law Review 55.
H W R Wade, 'Sovereignty - Revolution or Evolution?' (1996) 112 Law Quarterly Review 568.
P Craig, ' Sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament after Factortame' (1991) 11 Yearbook of European Law 221.
For a discussion of the Human Rights Act 1998, see especially Black Branch, above n 150, 64.
The United Kingdom signed the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in 1950 and ratified it in 1951. Since 1966 the United Kingdom has recognized the right of individual petition, which permits persons, and not merely states, to bring a case against the United Kingdom government before the European Court of Human Rights alleging contraventions of the Convention. However, in the absence of legislation incorporating it into domestic law, the Convention could not be relied upon directly before the British courts.
Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) s 6.
Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) s 3.
Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) s 4.
Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) s 4(6).
Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) s 10.
Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) s 10.
Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) s 10(1)(b).
Lord Irvine, 'The Influence of Europe on Public Law in the United Kingdom', in B Markesinis (ed), The Clifford Chance Millennium Lectures: The Coming Together of the Common Law and the Civil Law (2000) 11, 15 Lord Lester.
G Marshall, 'Interpreting Interpretation in the Human Rights Bill' [1998] Public Law 167; F Bennion, 'What Interpretation is "Possible" under Section 3(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998?' [2000] Public Law 77.
Rights Brought Home, Cm 3782 (1997) para. 2.7.
N Bamforth, 'Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Human Rights Act 1998' [1998] Public Law 572, 573-5.
D Feldman, 'The Human Rights Act 1998 and Constitutional principles' (1999) 12 Legal Studies 165, 178-80.
K D Ewing, 'The Human Rights Act and Parliamentary Democracy' (1999) 62 Modern Law Review 79.
HC Debs, Vol. 306, 1998: 773.
Note that Parliament retains the power of scrutiny over remedial orders and may disallow them prospectively at any stage.
B M Selway, 'The Constitution of the United Kingdom: A Long Distance Perspective' (2001) 30 Common Law World Review 3, 33.
Lord Bingham, 'Dicey Revisited' [2002] Public Law 39, 45.
Lord Lester, 'The Art of the Possible: Interpreting Statutes under the Human Rights Act' [1998] European Human Rights Law Review 665, 668.
181 Stoke-on-Trent City Council v B. & Q. plc. [1991] Ch 48, 56.
[2001] 2 NZLR 37, 66.
See only the statements in R v Pora [2001] 2 NZLR 37, 50-1 (Elias CJ, Thomas J, 65).
