Key Ideas in Law: The Rule of Law and the Separation of Powers. By Jack Beatson. [Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2021. 192 pp. Paperback £12.99. ISBN 978-1-50993-877-3.]

The UK constitution is going through a period of rapid change, some would even argue constant crises. Constitutional scholarship has become more reactive than proactive; illuminating and evaluating change rather than turning its gaze to longstanding principles. Sir Jack Beatson’s book provides a welcome reflection on two such principles, the rule of law and the separation of powers. In doing so, it not only manages to achieve its aim of providing a clear introductory exegesis, but also provides ample food for thought for constitutional scholars. The book begins with an overview of the UK constitution. Chapter 1 draws attention to its uncodified nature, its array of sources and the importance of parliamentary sovereignty. Having established this context, the book focuses first on an exegesis of the rule of law before turning to the separation of powers. After first providing an account, and an evaluation, of formal and substantive conceptions of the rule of law (Chapter 2), a further critical evaluation is made of Dicey’s theory, culminating in an assessment of Tom Bingham’s magisterial account (Chapter 3). These characteristics are used as a lens through which to assess the UK constitution, with chapters evaluating the accessibility of the law (Chapter 4), the extent to which the UK constitution checks arbitrary executive decision-making (Chapter 5), access to justice (Chapter 6), and the independence and impartiality of the judiciary (Chapter 7). The book then turns to the separation of powers. Beatson recognises the difficulty of applying this principle to the UK constitution, particularly given the fusion between the executive and the legislature. Consequently, he prefers to refer to and assess the balance of powers in the UK constitution (Chapter 8). The final chapter turns to provisions that enable majorities and protect minorities, examining the right to vote and parliamentary sovereignty, before assessing the extent to which the Human Rights Act 1998, the principle of legality, dicta regarding the exceptional circumstances where courts may refuse to recognise or enforce Acts of Parliament and the role of ouster clauses (Chapter 9). All of these are examined in order to evaluate the extent to which the UK constitution balances the protection of minorities against the protection of democracy through enabling majority rule. As part of the key ideas series, the book is designed to give a short overview. The book is a model of percipience. To produce a book that is so clear, detailed and current is an outstanding achievement. There is no dumbing-down for the constitutional novice and no obfuscatory short cuts in order to avoid contestable issues. Any newcomer to the UK constitution is richly rewarded with a broad knowledge and understanding of these key constitutional concepts. The book also has much to offer those who are more well-versed in the UK constitution and constitutional theory. This review will focus on four such examples, three of which can best be understood as the important need for scholars to engage in reality checking, and the fourth encourages us to rethink what we mean by constitutional balance. It is all too easy when discussing the rule of law to focus purely on case law. This is perhaps understandable in the current constitutional climate, in the light of televised Supreme Court cases, strongly-worded criticisms of the judiciary, and the ensuing promise of constitutional change in the 2019 manifesto of the current Conservative Government. The Independent Review of Administrative law, the Cambridge Law Journal, 81(3), November 2022, pp. 673–697 © The Authors, 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge