Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

I've not read Stephen Laws's paper, but from the reporting of it I do wonder whether he's missed the point that Parliament never debated, let alone approved, the ET fees Order, as of course it was a statutory instrument. And the (general) power under which the SI was made was created in legislation passed by a previous (Labour) government, with no suggestion by ministers at the time that the power would be used to introduce ET fees. So, there wasn't much (if any) constitutional legitimacy bestowed by Parliament for the Supreme Court to interfere with. And the Supreme Court did not say all ET fees are unlawful - only fees that are so high they obstruct justice. Ministers remain free to introduce another fees Order, if they want.

Your details

Cancel