1.Easy
Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects:
- AFreedom of religion
- BThe right to marry
- CThe right to liberty and security
- DThe right to an effective remedy
2.Easy
The principle of legality in public law means that a public authority:
- AMust always be elected
- BNeeds a legal basis for its actions, especially when interfering with rights
- CCan act freely unless a statute expressly prohibits the particular action taken
- DCan ignore laws during weekends
3.Easy
Individual ministerial responsibility means that a minister:
- ACan be removed from office by the courts
- BIs accountable to Parliament for their department and personal conduct
- CIs personally liable to pay damages for errors made by their civil servants
- DMust personally approve every decision of their department
4.Medium
Ellen Street Estates v Minister of Health is cited for the principle that:
- AEarlier Acts always prevail over later Acts
- BParliament cannot bind its successors, and a later Act impliedly repeals an inconsistent earlier one
- CParliament can entrench an Act against later repeal by stating expressly that it may not be amended in future
- DCourts may refuse to apply a later Act
5.Medium
A minister refuses to refer a complaint to a committee because the result might embarrass the government. In Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, the House of Lords held:
- AThe refusal was unlawful, as it frustrated the purpose of the Act
- BOnly Parliament could question the minister
- CThe minister had unlimited discretion
- DThe refusal was lawful, since the Act imposed no duty to give reasons
6.Medium
Under AG v De Keyser's Royal Hotel, when a statute covers the same ground as a prerogative power:
- AThe government can choose freely between the two
- BThe prerogative overrides the statute
- CThe prerogative is put in abeyance and the government must act under the statute
- DThe government may still choose the prerogative if it offers more flexible powers
7.Hard
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 changed the office of Lord Chancellor so that:
- AThe office was abolished completely
- BThe Lord Chancellor became President of the Supreme Court and head of the judiciary in England
- CThe Lord Chancellor gained power to dismiss judges
- DThe Lord Chief Justice, not the Lord Chancellor, is head of the judiciary in England and Wales
8.Hard
People buy TV licences early to avoid a fee increase, and the Home Office threatens to revoke them unless they pay the extra. In Congreve v Home Office, the court held:
- AUsing the revocation power this way was unlawful
- BLicence holders had no legal rights
- CThe revocation was lawful under the statute
- DThe minister could act for any purpose
Answer key
- 1. C · The right to liberty and security
- 2. B · Needs a legal basis for its actions, especially when interfering with rights
- 3. B · Is accountable to Parliament for their department and personal conduct
- 4. B · Parliament cannot bind its successors, and a later Act impliedly repeals an inconsistent earlier one
- 5. A · The refusal was unlawful, as it frustrated the purpose of the Act
- 6. C · The prerogative is put in abeyance and the government must act under the statute
- 7. D · The Lord Chief Justice, not the Lord Chancellor, is head of the judiciary in England and Wales
- 8. A · Using the revocation power this way was unlawful
Full step-by-step solutions: practise this topic on examproblems.com.