Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS
4 5 6 7 8 9
Reference Re Amendment of the Constitution of Canada [1982] 125 DLR. Manuel v Attorney General [1983] 1 Ch 77 See also Adegbenro v Akintola [1963] A.C. 614 and Ningkan v Government of Malaysia [1970] AC 379. e.g. legislation regarding health, social welfare, education etc. Laws & Conventions Distinguished. [1975] 91 L.Q.R. 218. See also, later notes on the Royal Prerogative and conventions.
Infra at p35 Ibralebbe v R [1964] AC 900 Privy Council Carltona v Commissioners of Works [1943] 2 All ER 560. A.G. v Jonathan Cape Ltd [1976] QB 752. See also 1 9 3 2 for a further example of such a breach. Madzimbamuto v Lardner-Burke [1969] 1 A.C. 6 4 5 .
16
See Stockdale v Hansard (1839) 9 Ad. & E 1. Council for Civil Service Unions v Minister
Definitions of Conventions
1 Dicey re purpose reinforce democracy. 3 Curzon origin function and scope. 2 Hood-Phillips - enforceability. 4 Freeman nature of conventions.
Rationale for Conventions : Function and Purpose Jennings flexible informal change to adapt to changing needs of society. Dicey to reinforce democracy Jennings an informal system of trust and honour which oils the legal constitutional machinery
Questions :
Do Conventions fulfil their functions? If not, is it a problem? Are Conventions necessary and is their function important? If so, what should be done to reform the constitution?
Certainty / Accessibility
Law perhaps but bulky Convention some certain others less so.
Effect of Breach
Law still a law Convention may cease Temporary lapse.
Flexibility
Law Rigid but rapid change possible. Conventions informal good for socially sensitive issues.
10