市场准入原则和下放权限的从属关系

NicholasRex Kilford
{"title":"市场准入原则和下放权限的从属关系","authors":"NicholasRex Kilford","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v75i1.1079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The United Kingdom (UK) Internal Market Act 2020’s ‘market access principles’ are capable of disapplying devolved legislation. Because that process qualifies the effectiveness but not the validity of that legislation, the UK Government contends that it leaves devolved competences intact and, therefore, respects the devolution settlement. However, this article argues that the use of disapplication to mechanise the market access principles has a deeper subordinating effect on devolved competence. This is because it suggests that devolved legislation is second-class, even within competence, and it implies that the settlement offers no protection for the effectiveness of devolved legislation, in stark contrast to the position accorded to Westminster. Further, disapplication also points to a less autonomous model of devolution, undermines legal certainty, and conceals significant constitutional changes from view. As such, far from neutralising the Act’s centralising tendencies, disapplication only exacerbates them.","PeriodicalId":509896,"journal":{"name":"Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly","volume":"29 45","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The market access principles and the subordination of devolved competence\",\"authors\":\"NicholasRex Kilford\",\"doi\":\"10.53386/nilq.v75i1.1079\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The United Kingdom (UK) Internal Market Act 2020’s ‘market access principles’ are capable of disapplying devolved legislation. Because that process qualifies the effectiveness but not the validity of that legislation, the UK Government contends that it leaves devolved competences intact and, therefore, respects the devolution settlement. However, this article argues that the use of disapplication to mechanise the market access principles has a deeper subordinating effect on devolved competence. This is because it suggests that devolved legislation is second-class, even within competence, and it implies that the settlement offers no protection for the effectiveness of devolved legislation, in stark contrast to the position accorded to Westminster. Further, disapplication also points to a less autonomous model of devolution, undermines legal certainty, and conceals significant constitutional changes from view. As such, far from neutralising the Act’s centralising tendencies, disapplication only exacerbates them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":509896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"29 45\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v75i1.1079\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v75i1.1079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

英国《2020 年内部市场法》的 "市场准入原则 "可以使下放的立法失效。由于该程序只限定立法的效力而非有效性,英国政府辩称,它使下放的权限保持不变,因此尊重了权力下放协议。然而,本文认为,使用不适用原则将市场准入原则机械化会对下放权限产生更深层次的从属影响。这是因为它表明,即使在权限范围内,下放的立法也是二等立法,这意味着该协议没有为下放立法的有效性提供保护,这与赋予威斯敏斯特的地位形成了鲜明对比。此外,不适用还表明权力下放模式的自主性较低,破坏了法律的确定性,并掩盖了重大的宪法变革。因此,该法的集权倾向非但没有得到中和,反而愈演愈烈。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The market access principles and the subordination of devolved competence
The United Kingdom (UK) Internal Market Act 2020’s ‘market access principles’ are capable of disapplying devolved legislation. Because that process qualifies the effectiveness but not the validity of that legislation, the UK Government contends that it leaves devolved competences intact and, therefore, respects the devolution settlement. However, this article argues that the use of disapplication to mechanise the market access principles has a deeper subordinating effect on devolved competence. This is because it suggests that devolved legislation is second-class, even within competence, and it implies that the settlement offers no protection for the effectiveness of devolved legislation, in stark contrast to the position accorded to Westminster. Further, disapplication also points to a less autonomous model of devolution, undermines legal certainty, and conceals significant constitutional changes from view. As such, far from neutralising the Act’s centralising tendencies, disapplication only exacerbates them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Northern Ireland Executive: politics, law and a rethink of judicial intervention Fettering scrutiny on executive discretionary powers? Developments in the judicial reviewability of ministerial non-statutory guidance Inheriting the royals: royal chartered bodies in Ireland after 1922 The Union in court, Part 3: In Re Allister and Peeples’ Applications for Judicial Review [2023] UKSC 5 A continuing nuisance: Jalla v Shell International Trading and Shipping Company Ltd [2023] UKSC 16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1