Artwork

内容由Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, Faculty of Law, and University of Cambridge提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, Faculty of Law, and University of Cambridge 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal
Player FM -播客应用
使用Player FM应用程序离线!

'R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal': CPL Discussion - Mark Elliott and Alison Young

58:26
 
分享
 

Manage episode 455131215 series 3623646
内容由Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, Faculty of Law, and University of Cambridge提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, Faculty of Law, and University of Cambridge 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal

A discussion held at the University of Cambridge on 18 November 2019, with Sir Patrick Elias, Professor Mark Elliott, and Professor Alison Young. The event was hosted by the Centre for Public Law.

In R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, the Supreme Court, by 4 judgments to 3, concluded that a clause removing judicial review of the court over decisions of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), including those as to whether the IPT had jurisdiction, could not remove judicial review by the court for legal errors made by the IPT when determining its jurisdiction. The legislation could be interpreted so as not to remove review over purported decisions as to whether the IPT had jurisdiction – in other words those decisions tainted by a legal error. The individual judgments provide an array of arguments which have an impact on how courts interpret ouster clauses and legislation more generally, the foundations of judicial review, parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law. This lecture explains the judgments and evaluates their implications.

For more information see: https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/

  continue reading

21集单集

Artwork
icon分享
 
Manage episode 455131215 series 3623646
内容由Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, Faculty of Law, and University of Cambridge提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, Faculty of Law, and University of Cambridge 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal

A discussion held at the University of Cambridge on 18 November 2019, with Sir Patrick Elias, Professor Mark Elliott, and Professor Alison Young. The event was hosted by the Centre for Public Law.

In R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, the Supreme Court, by 4 judgments to 3, concluded that a clause removing judicial review of the court over decisions of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), including those as to whether the IPT had jurisdiction, could not remove judicial review by the court for legal errors made by the IPT when determining its jurisdiction. The legislation could be interpreted so as not to remove review over purported decisions as to whether the IPT had jurisdiction – in other words those decisions tainted by a legal error. The individual judgments provide an array of arguments which have an impact on how courts interpret ouster clauses and legislation more generally, the foundations of judicial review, parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law. This lecture explains the judgments and evaluates their implications.

For more information see: https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/

  continue reading

21集单集

Todos los episodios

×
 
Loading …

欢迎使用Player FM

Player FM正在网上搜索高质量的播客,以便您现在享受。它是最好的播客应用程序,适用于安卓、iPhone和网络。注册以跨设备同步订阅。

 

快速参考指南