History
Parliamentary Sovereignty and Its Role in the UK Constitution
Quick fact
The UK Parliament can make or unmake any law, and no court can strike down an Act of Parliament—a power that even the US Supreme Court lacks over its Congress. This was tested when Parliament passed the War Damage Act 1965, which retroactively overrode a court ruling and stripped a company of its legal victory.
Why this is interesting
Imagine a country where a single law-making body can legalise anything overnight—even make you a criminal for drinking tea. In the UK, Parliament holds that power. But does that mean there are truly no limits?
Read the full explanation
Understanding Parliamentary Sovereignty and Its Role in the UK Constitution
Start with the idea that the UK's constitution is not written in a single document. It's built from statutes, common law, and conventions. At its core sits parliamentary sovereignty: the principle that Parliament is the supreme legal authority. This means whatever Parliament enacts, even a law that feels absurd, must be obeyed by courts and citizens alike. Think of it as a 'king can do no wrong' but for a legislature—except here, the crown has been replaced by the elected House of Commons and the House of Lords. What does this mean in practice? If Parliament passes a law saying that Tuesday is a national holiday, that's the law. Courts don't have a special 'constitutional review' button to veto it. They just apply it. This is why the UK is different from countries like the US or Germany, where a constitutional court can reject laws that conflict with a written constitution. The logic is simple: because Parliament is elected, and it represents the people, its will should not be challenged by unelected judges.
A deeper explanation
The mechanism behind this is a legal doctrine formalised by A.V. Dicey in the 19th century. He identified three pillars: (1) Parliament can make or repeal any law; (2) it cannot bind future Parliaments—each one is free to change earlier laws; and (3) courts cannot question an Act of Parliament. This last point is enforced by the 'enrolled bill rule': once a bill receives royal assent and becomes an Act, courts accept it as valid, even if there were procedural irregularities during passage. Why does this matter? Because it creates a legal hierarchy where the most recent statute wins. There is no higher law, like a constitution, to conflict with. But this absolute view has been challenged. From 1973 to 2020, EU law could override British statutes because Parliament, via the European Communities Act 1972, agreed to give EU law supremacy. Courts temporarily accepted EU law as higher than later British acts. After Brexit, the UK Parliament repealed that Act, restoring its absolute sovereignty. Also, the Human Rights Act 1998 lets courts declare a statute 'incompatible' with the European Convention on Human Rights, but this does not invalidate the statute—it only sends a signal to Parliament. Another constraint is 'implied repeal': if a later Act contradicts an earlier one, the later one prevails, which keeps parliamentary flexibility. These mechanisms reveal that parliamentary sovereignty is not a guarantee of ethical governance, but a legal rule that empowers the current Parliament to decide what is law, subject to political rather than judicial constraints.