(1)  
Core premise

The
judgement in the De Keyser’s Royal Hotel limits the prerogative with an
important constitutional principle. This principle strengthens parliamentary
sovereignty and illustrates the relationship between it and separation of
powers.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

 

 

(2)  
Core arguments

 

·       
This case illustrates that statute is supreme over prerogative
power, which supports the rule of statutory supremacy. This constitutional principle
has been around

o  
The
prerogative powers were established after the revolution, powers retained by
the monarch and the Executive, defined by A.V. Dicey

o  
Lord Dunedin said that when there is statutory
provision for the ground that the prerogative would go into abeyance.

 

·       
Prerogative powers are affected by the
Separation of powers and parliamentary sovereignty. The limitations that are
imposed on the prerogative.

o   A.V. Dicey’s principle of parliamentary
sovereignty suggests prerogative would take away parliamentary sovereignty if it
was not bound by legislation.

o   The prerogative is still able to enact
emergency to make any provision that could be passed under royal prerogative under
Civil Contingencies Act 2004.

o   Lord Atkinson stated if the legislature
were to create limitations that could be disregarded then then it would be
useless and meaningless, this shows distinct separation between the legislature
and the executive.

o   Common law, Case of Proclamations (1611),
states that the judiciary has the right to decide on the limits set to the prerogative.
This means that it is up for the judiciary to decide any limits on the
prerogative, which shows the importance of separation of powers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·       
The decisions after De Keyser have
continued to limit the prerogative, which leaves only few ways in which the
prerogative can be used

o  
Laker
Airway Ltd v Department of Trade confirmed statutory superiority which extended
to this case.

o  
The
decision in R v Secretary of State
for the Home Department further limits the prerogative, where it was held that
the prerogative could not be used to alter a statutory provision to ‘conflict
with parliament’s wishes.

o   Uncodified
prerogative is so that it allows greater flexibility in times of emergency,
however it has been said that it
difficult to see what could be done under the Royal Prerogative that could not
be done by an act of parliament.