There have been few studies of the Law Lords, and no study of them by a political scientist for more than ten years. This book concentrates on the arguments the Law Lords use in justifying their decisions, and is concerned as much with the legal methodology as with the substance of theirdecisions. Very close attention is paid to the different approaches and styles of judicial argument, but the book is not restricted to this traditional analytic approach. One chapter applies the statistical techniques Americans call 'jurimetrics' and have successfully used on the US Supreme Court. The main theme is that the Law Lords enjoy and fully utilise far more discretion in their judgements than is normally admitted, and that much depends on exactly which judges happen to hear a case. the second part of the book shows the impact this extreme discretion has had in shaping both public lawand areas of civil law.

Winner of the Inner Temple book prize 2015 and the Socio-Legal Studies Association Book prize 2014/15 The House of Lords, for over 300 years the UK's highest court, was transformed in 2009 into the UK Supreme Court. This book provides a compelling and unrivalled view into the workings of the Court during its final decade, and into the formative years of the Supreme Court. Drawing on over 100 interviews, including more than 40 with Law Lords and Justices, and uniquely, some of their judicial notebooks, this is a landmark study of appellate judging 'from the inside' by an author whose earlier work on the House of Lords has provided a scholarly benchmark for over 30 years. The book demonstrates that appellate decision-making in the UK's final court remains a social and collective process, primarily because of the dialogues which take place between the judges and the key groups with which they interact when reaching their decisions. As the book shows, the forms of dialogue are now more varied, yet the most significant dialogues continue to be with their fellow Law Lords and Justices, and with counsel. To these, new dialogues have been added, namely those with foreign courts (especially Strasbourg) and with judicial assistants, which have subtly altered the tenor and import of their other dialogues. The research reveals that, unlike the English Court of Appeal, the House of Lords in its last decade was only intermittently collegial since Lord Bingham's philosophy of appellate judging left opinion writing, concurrences and dissents largely to individual preference. In the Supreme Court, however, there has been a marked shift to team working and collective decision-making bringing with it challenges and occasional tensions not seen in the final years of the House of Lords. The work shows that effectiveness in group-decision making in the final court turns in part on the stages when dialogues occur, in part on the geography of the court and in part on the task leadership and social leadership skills of the judges involved in particular cases. The passing of the Human Rights Act and the expansion in judicial review over the last 30 years have dramatically altered the two remaining dialogues - those with Parliament and with the Executive. With the former, the dialogue has grown more distant, with the latter, more problematic, than was the case 40 years ago. The last chapter rehearses where the changing dialogues have left the UK's final court. Ironically, despite the oft applauded commitment of the new Court to public visibility, the book concludes that even greater transparency in the dialogue with the public may be required. 'The way appellate judges at the highest level behave to each other, to counsel, with other branches of government and with other courts is brought under closer scrutiny in this book than ever before...The remarkable width and depth of his examination...has resulted in a work of real scholarship, which all those who are interested in how appellate courts work all over the common law world will find especially valuable.' From the foreword by Lord Hope of Craighead KT 'Alan Paterson's knowledge and interest in the Supreme Court, coupled with his expertise as a lawyer who understands the legal system and the judicial process, make him a perfect chronicler and assessor of what the Court's role is and what it should be, and how it functions and how it might improve.' Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court

In 2009 a new UK Supreme Court takes on the judicial functions of the House of Lords. In this book a group of over 40 eminent lawyers and legal historians look back over the 130 years of the judicial House of Lords to give a comprehensive history of its role, reputation and impact on the law in the UK and beyond.

The House of Lords served as the highest court in the UK for over 130 years. In 2009 the new UK Supreme Court took over its judicial functions, closing the doors on one of the most influential legal institutions in the world, and a major chapter in the history of the UK legal system. This volume gathers over 40 leading scholars and practitioners from the UK and beyond to provide a comprehensive history of the House of Lords as a judicial institution, charting its role, working practices, reputation and impact on the law and UK legal system. The book examines the origins of the House's judicial work; the different phases in the court's history; the international reputation and influence of the House in the legal profession; the domestic perception of the House outside the law; and the impact of the House on the UK legal tradition and substantive law. The book offers an invaluable overview of the Judicial House of Lords and a major historical record for the UK legal system now that it has passed into the next chapter in its history.

This book analyses the development and current position of the Lord Chancellor in his various roles.

This publication contains the Standing Orders of the House of Lords which set out information on the procedure and working of the House, under a range of headings including: Lords and the manner of their introduction; excepted hereditary peers; the Speaker; general observances; debates; arrangement of business; bills; divisions; committees; parliamentary papers; public petitions; privilege; making or suspending of Standing Orders.

This new book examines the House of Lords in both its Parliamentary and its judicial capacity. A total of 14 contributors discuss such important topics as the membership of the House,how the House compares with other second chambers in bicameral legislatures elsewhere, the role of the Lord Chancellor, the rules concerning discussion of sub judice matters and the stance taken by the Law Lords towards European Community law. At a time when the future of the House is once again under active consideration, the book serves to remind readers of the significance of the institution to the British constitution. It will be of interest to students of government and law as well as to practitioners in the field, including Parliamentarians and judges. The issues dealt with in this book go to the heart of how democracy manifests itself in the United Kingdom today.'. Contributors: Michael Rush, Nicholas Baldwin, Rodney Brazier, Paul Carmichael, Andrew Baker, Patricia Leopold, Gavin Drewry, Sir Louis Blom-Cooper, Brice Dickson, Barry Fitzpatrick, Anthony Bradney, Patricia Maxwell, Kenny Mullan, Simon Lee.

A starting point for the study of the English Constitution and comparative constitutional law, The Law of the Constitution elucidates the guiding principles of the modern constitution of England: the legislative sovereignty of Parliament, the rule of law, and the binding force of unwritten conventions.

This is a draft Bill and white paper on proposals to change the House of Lords into a more democratically elected second chamber. A cross-party Committee met seven times from June to December 2010 and considered all reform issues related to the House of Lords. Agreement was reached on a large number of issues but differences in opinion remain on the size of the elected element and the type of electoral system. The Government now wants to take the discussion forward to a debate on the detail. Proposals include an 80 percent elected House of Lords but a wholly elected House of Lords has not been ruled out. The Draft Bill sets out elections using the Single Transferable Vote system but it is recognised that a case can be made for other proportional systems too. Other proposals, name, size, functions, powers and term length are some of several issues discussed.