PARLIAMENTARY SUPERAMACY
This essay gives us detailed description about the concept of parliamentary sovereignty and also
illustrates its significance. It describes that how Different scholar proves that parliament is
superior form of law and how judiciary recognizes it as the higher order law. We will also discuss
the three limbs of parliamentary sovereignty that are given by Dicey and also explain the
doctrine that the Acts of parliament are repealed impliedly or expressly. Lastly, the distinction
between the legal and political constitutionalists are discussed in the words of Denning.
Parliamentary sovereignty is defined as the set of regulations concerning with the lawmaking
competency of the parliament of UK and it operates to the UK parliament, Northern Ireland
Assembly, Scottish Parliament and the National assembly for Wales are all developed by UK
parliament and they have only lawmaking powers that also given by parliament. In the
judgments of High Court, “the most significant regulation of constitution of UK is that the
parliament is sovereign and the laws made by parliament with the consensus of both houses is
supreme, parliament has authority to alter any law of primary legislation if they want” [Miller v
Secretary of State for Existing the European Union (2016)].
Parliamentary sovereignty is of great significance for political constitutionalists as it allows the
member parliaments that are the elected representatives to make decisions about legislation
rather than judges. On the other hand, legal constitutionalists believes that change in constitution
should be done by the judiciary. Political event that is named as ‘glorious revolution’
established the parliamentary sovereignty. After that in 1689, the Bill of Rights defines two
features as it converts the monarchy into constitutional monarchy by restricting the use of
prerogative powers and secondly it describes that the king or queen was bound by the
Parliament. Court held that “It is clear that laws established by the parliament is considered as
the superior form of law that everyone has to fulfill including government” [Miller v The Prime
Minister; Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland (2019)].
Dicey describes the parliamentary sovereignty in his book ‘The law of the constitution” as “it is
the keystone of the constitution” He says that “uncodified constitution of UK has two important
principles as he named them the two pillars that is actually the parliamentary sovereignty and the
Rule of law”. Dicey also says that “as there is no higher order law in the UK and due to the
absence of codified constitution, it is not possible to check the validity of laws made by
, parliament”. In the words of Kelsen, “it is the basic norm of the UK constitution and whole
British constitution is based on this principle”.
Acts of Parliament is superior form of law in UK and the Westminster Parliament has highest
authority because the constitution of UK is uncodified and cannot be present in written form. In
codified constitutions, the constitution is supreme and courts such as supreme court are allowed
to interpret the laws. So, the sovereign body in UK is ‘queen in parliament’ who can make any
law and courts have no authority to declare them invalid, unconstitutional and incompatible. In
the words of Loveland, “parliament is the one who make laws that are the basis of statute and
these laws are considered as superior within UK constitution”. Parliamentary supremacy is
depended upon the legislative sovereignty of Acts of Parliaments. Tomkins says that “there is no
source of legislation superior than a statute in British law”.
Judiciary recognizes and accepts the Parliament and its Acts as the higher law and says that it is
responsibility of courts to follow principles of parliament. “Parliament supremacy is actually the
judge made principle and also described as a idea of common law” [Jackson v Attorney
General (2005)]. In this case Lord Steyn Barnett states that, “parliament supremacy is most
significant regulation of common law and judges have to uphold it, as long as courts follow it
parliamentary sovereignty is the ultimate rule”. Barnett also describes the exceptions in which
courts are allowed to refuse the implementation of law such as “if there is a situation to eliminate
judicial review or the usual part of the courts, then courts have to study or examine that whether
it is constitutive essentials which even a parliament behaving at the request of a compliant House
of Commons cannot eliminate”.
Dicey who is the political constitutionalist also gives the orthodox view and gives the three main
limbs of parliamentary sovereignty. Firstly, he says that parliament has authority to create or
unmake any law because it is supreme and Parliament has unrestrained lawmaking competence.
It is understood due to the statutory interpretation that parliament cannot legislate retrospectively
or opposing to rules of international law but these beliefs can be invalidated by strong wording in
statute. It means that parliament allowed to make laws retrospectively as done in the War
Damages Act 1965, or in War Crimes Act 1991 but parliament also reject the pronouncement of
House of Lords as it can be done in [Burmah Oil Company v Lord Advocate (1965)]. Court
clearly describes that the higher order law is parliament and it also conquers over international
This essay gives us detailed description about the concept of parliamentary sovereignty and also
illustrates its significance. It describes that how Different scholar proves that parliament is
superior form of law and how judiciary recognizes it as the higher order law. We will also discuss
the three limbs of parliamentary sovereignty that are given by Dicey and also explain the
doctrine that the Acts of parliament are repealed impliedly or expressly. Lastly, the distinction
between the legal and political constitutionalists are discussed in the words of Denning.
Parliamentary sovereignty is defined as the set of regulations concerning with the lawmaking
competency of the parliament of UK and it operates to the UK parliament, Northern Ireland
Assembly, Scottish Parliament and the National assembly for Wales are all developed by UK
parliament and they have only lawmaking powers that also given by parliament. In the
judgments of High Court, “the most significant regulation of constitution of UK is that the
parliament is sovereign and the laws made by parliament with the consensus of both houses is
supreme, parliament has authority to alter any law of primary legislation if they want” [Miller v
Secretary of State for Existing the European Union (2016)].
Parliamentary sovereignty is of great significance for political constitutionalists as it allows the
member parliaments that are the elected representatives to make decisions about legislation
rather than judges. On the other hand, legal constitutionalists believes that change in constitution
should be done by the judiciary. Political event that is named as ‘glorious revolution’
established the parliamentary sovereignty. After that in 1689, the Bill of Rights defines two
features as it converts the monarchy into constitutional monarchy by restricting the use of
prerogative powers and secondly it describes that the king or queen was bound by the
Parliament. Court held that “It is clear that laws established by the parliament is considered as
the superior form of law that everyone has to fulfill including government” [Miller v The Prime
Minister; Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland (2019)].
Dicey describes the parliamentary sovereignty in his book ‘The law of the constitution” as “it is
the keystone of the constitution” He says that “uncodified constitution of UK has two important
principles as he named them the two pillars that is actually the parliamentary sovereignty and the
Rule of law”. Dicey also says that “as there is no higher order law in the UK and due to the
absence of codified constitution, it is not possible to check the validity of laws made by
, parliament”. In the words of Kelsen, “it is the basic norm of the UK constitution and whole
British constitution is based on this principle”.
Acts of Parliament is superior form of law in UK and the Westminster Parliament has highest
authority because the constitution of UK is uncodified and cannot be present in written form. In
codified constitutions, the constitution is supreme and courts such as supreme court are allowed
to interpret the laws. So, the sovereign body in UK is ‘queen in parliament’ who can make any
law and courts have no authority to declare them invalid, unconstitutional and incompatible. In
the words of Loveland, “parliament is the one who make laws that are the basis of statute and
these laws are considered as superior within UK constitution”. Parliamentary supremacy is
depended upon the legislative sovereignty of Acts of Parliaments. Tomkins says that “there is no
source of legislation superior than a statute in British law”.
Judiciary recognizes and accepts the Parliament and its Acts as the higher law and says that it is
responsibility of courts to follow principles of parliament. “Parliament supremacy is actually the
judge made principle and also described as a idea of common law” [Jackson v Attorney
General (2005)]. In this case Lord Steyn Barnett states that, “parliament supremacy is most
significant regulation of common law and judges have to uphold it, as long as courts follow it
parliamentary sovereignty is the ultimate rule”. Barnett also describes the exceptions in which
courts are allowed to refuse the implementation of law such as “if there is a situation to eliminate
judicial review or the usual part of the courts, then courts have to study or examine that whether
it is constitutive essentials which even a parliament behaving at the request of a compliant House
of Commons cannot eliminate”.
Dicey who is the political constitutionalist also gives the orthodox view and gives the three main
limbs of parliamentary sovereignty. Firstly, he says that parliament has authority to create or
unmake any law because it is supreme and Parliament has unrestrained lawmaking competence.
It is understood due to the statutory interpretation that parliament cannot legislate retrospectively
or opposing to rules of international law but these beliefs can be invalidated by strong wording in
statute. It means that parliament allowed to make laws retrospectively as done in the War
Damages Act 1965, or in War Crimes Act 1991 but parliament also reject the pronouncement of
House of Lords as it can be done in [Burmah Oil Company v Lord Advocate (1965)]. Court
clearly describes that the higher order law is parliament and it also conquers over international
