February 2017
In asserting in absolute terms the doctrine of UK parliamentary sovereignty, the Supreme Court has left us with constitutional paradoxes and a decision that will exacerbate political tensions with the devolved nations
What the decision in Miller means for the legal effect of referendums, and what any future enabling legislation should contain in light of the Brexit experience
Does it show a strength or a weakness in the constitution that the Miller decision was reached on the basis of principles said to be centuries old?
The effect of the bill to authorise the formal notice to withdraw from the EU – and why should it be thought that the Sewel convention does not apply?
This month's selection of leisure reading, chosen by the Journal's book review editor
In this issue
- Miller, Brexit and BreUK-up
- Power to the people?
- Prerogatives, Parliament and the constitution: plus ça change?
- Decisions in high places
- Reading for pleasure
- Journal magazine index 2016
- Opinion: Callum Sinclair
- Book reviews
- Profile
- President's column
- Have you heard of ScotLIS?
- People on the move
- Article 50: the final say
- Where courts fear to tread
- "Wake up": how young lawyers see the future
- How healthy is our legal aid system?
- Challenging assumptions
- Planning to deliver
- Contact and the fear factor
- And the bill goes to...?
- Pakistan to join Child Abduction Convention
- Dress to impress?
- Handcuffing of prisoners and article 3
- Turning up the heat on workplace change
- Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal
- Not just for the green welly brigade
- Five by five
- Law reform roundup
- Relief over pensions and bankruptcy ruling
- Helpline plus
- Spill the beans on legal aid fraud
- The art of bringing the good news
- Cybercrime: how are you protected?
- Ask Ash
- One year rule becomes three
- From the Brussels office
Additional
