Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

The Middlesex Guildhall in London is the location of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is the supreme court in all matters under
English and Welsh law, Northern Ireland law and Scottish civil law. It is the court of
last resort and the highest appellate court in the United Kingdom, although the High
Court of Justiciary remains the court of last resort for criminal law in Scotland. The
Supreme Court also has jurisdiction to resolve disputes relating to devolution in the
United Kingdom and concerning the legal powers of the three devolved governments
(in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) or laws made by the devolved legislatures.
The Supreme Court was established by Part 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005
and started work on 1 October 2009.[1][2] It assumed the judicial functions of the House of
Lords, which had been exercised by the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (commonly called
"Law Lords"), the 12 judges appointed as members of the House of Lords to carry out
its judicial business. Its jurisdiction over devolution matters had previously been
exercised by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
Because of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, the Supreme Court is much more
limited in its powers of judicial review than the constitutional or supreme courts of
some other countries. It cannot overturn any primary legislation made by Parliament.[3]
However, it can overturn secondary legislation if, for example, that legislation is found
to be ultra vires to the powers in primary legislation allowing it to be made. Further,
under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998, the Supreme Court, like some other
courts in the United Kingdom, may make a declaration of incompatibility, indicating
that it believes that the legislation subject to the declaration is incompatible with one of
the rights in the European Convention on Human Rights.[4] Such a declaration can apply
to primary or secondary legislation. The legislation is not overturned by the declaration,
and neither Parliament nor the government is required to agree with any such
declaration. However, if they do accept a declaration, ministers can exercise powers
under section 10 of the act to amend the legislation by statutory instrument to remove
the incompatibility, or ask Parliament to amend the legislation.[5]
The current President of the Supreme Court is Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, and its
Deputy President is Baroness Hale of Richmond.

Jurisdiction[edit]
The main role of the Supreme Court is to hear appeals from courts in the United
Kingdom's three legal systems: England and Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland
(English and Welsh law differ only to the extent that the National Assembly for Wales
makes laws for Wales that differ from those in England, and the two countries have a
shared court system). The Supreme Court acts as the highest court for civil appeals from
the Court of Session in Scotland, but the highest appeal for criminal cases is kept in
Scotland.[6]

For civil cases decided prior to September 2015, permission to appeal from the Court of
Session is not required and any such case can proceed to the Supreme Court of the
United Kingdom if two Advocates certify that an appeal is suitable. The entry into force
of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 has essentially brought the procedure for
current and future Scottish civil cases into line with England, Wales and Northern
Ireland,[7] where permission to appeal is required, either from the Court of Appeal or
from a Justice of the Supreme Court itself.
The Supreme Court's focus is on cases that raise points of law of general public
importance. As with the former Appellate Committee of the House of Lords, appeals
from many fields of law are likely to be selected for hearing, including commercial
disputes, family matters, judicial review claims against public authorities and issues
under the Human Rights Act 1998. The Supreme Court also hears some criminal
appeals, but not from Scotland, as there is no general right of appeal from the High
Court of Justiciary, Scotland's highest criminal court, other than with respect to
devolution issues.
The Supreme Court also determines "devolution issues" (as defined by the Scotland Act
1998, the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and the Government of Wales Act 2006). These are
legal proceedings about the powers of the three devolved administrationsthe Northern
Ireland Executive and Northern Ireland Assembly, the Scottish Government and the
Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh Government and the National Assembly for Wales.
Devolution issues were previously heard by the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council and most are about compliance with rights under the European Convention on
Human Rights, brought into national law by the Devolution Acts and the Human Rights
Act 1998.
The twelve justices do not all hear every case. Typically a case is heard by a panel of
five justices, though sometimes the panel may consist of three, seven or nine members.
All twelve justices are also members of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and
spend some of their time in that capacity.

History[edit]
The creation of a Supreme Court for the United Kingdom was first mooted in a
consulation paper published by the Department of Constitutional Affairs in July 2003.[8]
Although the paper noted that there had been no criticism of the then-current Law Lords
or any indication of an actual bias, it argued that the separation of the judicial functions
of the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords from the legislative functions of the
House of Lords should be made explicit. The paper noted the following concerns:
1. Whether there was any longer sufficient transparency of independence from the
executive and the legislature to give assurance of the independence of the
judiciary.[8]
2. The requirement for the appearance of impartiality and independence limited the
ability of the Law Lords to contribute to the work of the House itself, thus
reducing the value to both them and the House of their membership.[8]

3. It was not always understood by the public that judicial decisions of "the House
of Lords" were in fact taken by the Judicial Committee and that non-judicial
members were never involved in the judgments. Conversely, it was felt that the
extent to which the Law Lords themselves had decided to refrain from getting
involved in political issues in relation to legislation on which they might later
have had to adjudicate was not always appreciated.[8] The new President of the
Court, Lord Phillips, has claimed that the old system had confused people and
that with the Supreme Court there would for the first time be a clear separation
of powers among the judiciary, the legislature and the executive.[9]
4. Space within the House of Lords was at a constant premium and a separate
supreme court would ease the pressure on the Palace of Westminster.[8]
The main argument against a new Supreme Court was that the previous system had
worked well and kept costs down.[10] Reformers expressed concern that this second main
example of mixture of the legislative, judicial and executive might conflict with
professed values under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Officials who make
or execute laws have an interest in court cases that put those laws to the test. When the
state invests judicial authority in those officials or even their day-to-day colleagues, it
puts the independence and impartiality of the courts at risk. Consequently, it was
hypothesised closely connected decisions of the Law Lords to debates had by friends or
on which the Lord Chancellor had expressed a view might be challenged on Human
Rights grounds on the basis that they had not constituted a fair trial.[11]
Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, later President of the Supreme Court, expressed fear
that the new court could make itself more powerful than the House of Lords committee
it succeeded, saying that there is a real risk of "judges arrogating to themselves greater
power than they have at the moment". Lord Phillips said such an outcome was "a
possibility", but was "unlikely".[12]
The reforms were controversial and were brought forward with little consultation but
were subsequently extensively debated in Parliament.[13] During 2004, a select
committee of the House of Lords scrutinised the arguments for and against setting up a
new court.[14] The Government estimated the set-up cost of the Supreme Court at 56.9
million.[15]
The Supreme Court was established by Part 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005
and started work on 1 October 2009. It assumed the judicial functions of the House of
Lords, which were exercised by the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (commonly called
"Law Lords"), the 12 professional judges appointed as members of the House of Lords
to carry out its judicial business. Its jurisdiction over devolution matters had previously
been held by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
The first case heard by the Supreme Court was HM Treasury v Ahmad, which
concerned "the separation of powers", according to Lord Phillips, its inaugural
President. At issue was the extent to which Parliament has, by the United Nations Act
1946, delegated to the executive the power to legislate. Resolution of this issue
depended upon the approach properly to be adopted by the court in interpreting
legislation which may affect fundamental rights at common law or under the European
Convention on Human Rights.

Other supreme courts in the United Kingdom[edit]

The High Court of Justiciary, the Court of Session, and the Office of the Accountant of
Court comprise the College of Justice, and are known as the Supreme Courts of
Scotland.[16]
Before 1 October 2009 there were two other courts known as supreme court, namely the
Supreme Court of England and Wales (known as the Supreme Court of Judicature until
1981), which was created in the 1870s under the Judicature Acts, and the Supreme
Court of Judicature in Northern Ireland, each of which consisted of a Court of Appeal, a
High Court of Justice and a Crown Court. When the provisions of the Constitutional
Reform Act 2005 came into force these became known as the Senior Courts of England
and Wales and the Court of Judicature of Northern Ireland respectively.

Justices[edit]
Main article: Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
The court is composed of the President and Deputy President and 10 puisne Justices of
the Supreme Court. They are not subject to term limits, but may be removed from office
on the address of Parliament.[17] Like all British judges, Supreme Court justices are
obliged to retire at age 70 if first appointed to a judicial office after 31 March 1995, or
at age 75 otherwise.[18][19] The President and Deputy President of the court are separately
appointed to those roles.
Ten Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (Law Lords) holding office on 1 October 2009 became
the first justices of the 12-member Supreme Court.[20] The 11th place on the Supreme
Court was filled by Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony (formerly the Master of the
Rolls), who was the first Justice to be appointed directly to the Supreme Court.[21] One of
the former Law Lords, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, was appointed to replace Lord
Clarke as Master of the Rolls,[22] and so did not move to the new court. Sir John Dyson
became the 12th and final justice of the Supreme Court on 13 April 2010, becoming
entitled at the same moment to the courtesy style "Lord Dyson".[23]
The Senior Law Lord on 1 October 2009, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, became the
Supreme Court's first President,[24] and the Second Senior Law Lord, Lord Hope of
Craighead, became the first Deputy President.
On 30 September 2010 Lord Saville of Newdigate became the first Justice to retire,[25]
followed by Lord Collins of Mapesbury on 7 May 2011, although the latter remained as
an acting Justice until the end of July 2011.
In June 2011 Lord Rodger of Earlsferry became the first Justice to die in office, after a
short illness.[26]

Acting judges[edit]
In addition to the twelve permanent Justices, the President may request other senior
judges, drawn from two groups, to sit as "acting judges" of the Supreme Court.[27]

The first group is those judges who hold 'office as a senior territorial judge':
judges of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, judges of the Court of
Appeal of Northern Ireland and judges of the First or Second Division of the
Inner House of the Court of Session in Scotland.

The second group is known as the 'supplementary panel'. The President may
approve in writing retired senior judges' membership of this panel if they are
under 75 years of age (a system similar to senior status in the United States
Federal Courts of Appeal).

Appointment process[edit]
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 makes provision for a new appointment process
for Justices of the Supreme Court. A selection commission is to be formed when
vacancies arise. This is to be composed of the President and Deputy President of the
Supreme Court and a member of the Judicial Appointments Commission of England
and Wales, the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland and the Northern Ireland
Judicial Appointments Commission. In October 2007, the Ministry of Justice announced
that this appointment process would be adopted on a voluntary basis for appointments
of Lords of Appeal in Ordinary.[28]
The commission selects one person for the vacancy, and notifies the Lord Chancellor of
its choice. The Lord Chancellor then either

approves the commission's selection

rejects the commission's selection, or

asks the commission to reconsider its selection.

If the Lord Chancellor approves the person selected by the commission, the Prime
Minister must then recommend that person to the Monarch for appointment.[29]
New judges appointed to the Supreme Court after its creation will not necessarily
receive peerages; however, they are given the courtesy title of Lord or Lady upon
appointment.[30][31] The President and Deputy President are appointed to those roles rather
than being the most senior by tenure in office.

Building[edit]
Main article: Middlesex Guildhall
Court 1 in the Supreme Court building
The court is housed in Middlesex Guildhall which it shares with the Judicial
Committee of the Privy Council in the City of Westminster.

The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 gave time for a suitable building to be found and
fitted out before the Law Lords moved out of the Houses of Parliament, where they had
previously used a series of rooms in the Palace of Westminster.[32]
After a lengthy survey of suitable sites, including Somerset House, the Government
announced that the new court would be at the Middlesex Guildhall, in Parliament
Square, Westminster. That decision was examined by the Constitutional Affairs
Committee,[33] and the grant of planning permission by Westminster City Council for
refurbishment works was challenged in a judicial review by the conservation group
SAVE Britain's Heritage.[34] It was also reported that English Heritage had been put
under great pressure to approve the alterations.[35] Feilden + Mawson, supported by
Foster & Partners, were the appointed architects.[36]
The building had been used as the Middlesex Quarter Sessions House, adding later its
County Council chamber, and lastly as a Crown Court.

Badge[edit]

The emblem with stylised depictions of the four floral emblems.

The official badge of the Supreme Court was granted by the College of Arms in October
2008.[37] It comprises both the Greek letter omega (representing finality) and the symbol
of Libra (symbolising the scales of justice), in addition to the four floral emblems of the
United Kingdom: a Tudor rose, representing England, conjoined with the leaves of a
leek, representing Wales; a flax blossom for Northern Ireland; and a thistle, representing
Scotland.[38]
Two adapted versions of its official badge are used by the Supreme Court. One features
the words "The Supreme Court" and the letter omega in black (in the official badge
granted by the College of Arms, the interior of the Latin and Greek letters are gold and
white, respectively), and displays a simplified version of the crown (also in black) and
larger, stylised versions of the floral emblems; this modified version of the badge is
featured on the new Supreme Court website,[39] as well as in the forms that will be used
by the Supreme Court.[40] A further variant on the above omits the crown entirely and is
featured prominently throughout the building.[41]
Another emblem is formed from a more abstract set of depictions of the four floral
emblems and is used in the carpets of the Middlesex Guildhall designed by Sir Peter
Blake, creator of such works as the cover of The Beatles' 1967 album, Sgt. Pepper's
Lonely Hearts Club Band.[42][43]