Mark Elliott
@profmarkelliott.bsky.social
Professor of Public Law, University of Cambridge. Fellow, St Catharine's College, Cambridge. Blog: www.publiclawforeveryone.com. Website: www.markelliott.org
One of the highlights of one of the Covid lockdowns was the arrival of hard copies of the new edition of my textbook; the feline member of the household, who loves boxes rather than books, was also delighted.
October 29, 2025 at 8:09 AM
One of the highlights of one of the Covid lockdowns was the arrival of hard copies of the new edition of my textbook; the feline member of the household, who loves boxes rather than books, was also delighted.
In the post, I reflect on the Security Minister's statement to the House of Commons on the collapse of the China espionage case. I conclude that if a single official really is responsible, Ministers cannot evade responsibility for an inadequate decision-making system. 2/2
October 13, 2025 at 8:39 PM
In the post, I reflect on the Security Minister's statement to the House of Commons on the collapse of the China espionage case. I conclude that if a single official really is responsible, Ministers cannot evade responsibility for an inadequate decision-making system. 2/2
It will be interesting to see what Ministers are prepared to say about the China spying case from the despatch box. I am surprising that this morning's line to take still seems to turn on China not having been "designated" a threat/enemy by the last government. /1
October 13, 2025 at 8:23 AM
It will be interesting to see what Ministers are prepared to say about the China spying case from the despatch box. I am surprising that this morning's line to take still seems to turn on China not having been "designated" a threat/enemy by the last government. /1
Excellent (but depressing) analysis by @gsoh31.bsky.social on the fragile state of higher education in the UK. This passage particularly struck me. politicalquarterly.org.uk/blog/where-n...
October 2, 2025 at 8:29 AM
Excellent (but depressing) analysis by @gsoh31.bsky.social on the fragile state of higher education in the UK. This passage particularly struck me. politicalquarterly.org.uk/blog/where-n...
It was a great pleasure to speak at today's annual training day for the Administrative Court (at the Oval cricket ground: hence the photo!), looking at how recent case law intersects with key academic debates about substantive judicial review.
September 26, 2025 at 5:15 PM
It was a great pleasure to speak at today's annual training day for the Administrative Court (at the Oval cricket ground: hence the photo!), looking at how recent case law intersects with key academic debates about substantive judicial review.
It also appears that the report's authors envisage that changes to domestic law under the influence of the ECHR-HRA regime, such as the adoption of the proportionality principle in certain contexts, might be reversed. /6
July 21, 2025 at 10:03 AM
It also appears that the report's authors envisage that changes to domestic law under the influence of the ECHR-HRA regime, such as the adoption of the proportionality principle in certain contexts, might be reversed. /6
The common law is, however, fetishised by the authors, who overlook that it was precisely the weakness of the traditional apporach, that relied on the residual liberty of the individual, that prompted the enactment of the HRA. /5
July 21, 2025 at 10:03 AM
The common law is, however, fetishised by the authors, who overlook that it was precisely the weakness of the traditional apporach, that relied on the residual liberty of the individual, that prompted the enactment of the HRA. /5
A fascinating piece about the right to trial by jury, including a particularly interesting discussion of the different senses in which a right might be 'constitutional'. The argument that Leveson adopted an unduly narrow view of this seems compelling to me. ukconstitutionallaw.org/2025/07/18/a...
July 18, 2025 at 10:13 AM
A fascinating piece about the right to trial by jury, including a particularly interesting discussion of the different senses in which a right might be 'constitutional'. The argument that Leveson adopted an unduly narrow view of this seems compelling to me. ukconstitutionallaw.org/2025/07/18/a...
V good paper by @echrhawk.bsky.social - 'The Human Rights Act under Siege: The Vulnerability of Fundamental Rights Protection under the UK Constitution' - reflecting on implications of legislation passed in 'dying days' of last govt. A sobering conclusion. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
June 17, 2025 at 4:09 PM
V good paper by @echrhawk.bsky.social - 'The Human Rights Act under Siege: The Vulnerability of Fundamental Rights Protection under the UK Constitution' - reflecting on implications of legislation passed in 'dying days' of last govt. A sobering conclusion. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
Belatedly catching up with this very good piece by Leah Trueblood on the Court of Appeal's recent Tortoise Media case. I have a lot of sympathy with her argument that the court read the Datafin judgment unjustifiably narrowly. ukconstitutionallaw.org/2025/06/11/l...
June 17, 2025 at 2:06 PM
Belatedly catching up with this very good piece by Leah Trueblood on the Court of Appeal's recent Tortoise Media case. I have a lot of sympathy with her argument that the court read the Datafin judgment unjustifiably narrowly. ukconstitutionallaw.org/2025/06/11/l...
A fascinating @ukcla.bsky.social post by David Sugarman on the decisions of the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords on the extradition of Pinochet. I've always thought it highly regrettable that the law was strained so badly to spare embarassment ukconstitutionallaw.org/2025/03/31/d...
April 1, 2025 at 10:01 AM
A fascinating @ukcla.bsky.social post by David Sugarman on the decisions of the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords on the extradition of Pinochet. I've always thought it highly regrettable that the law was strained so badly to spare embarassment ukconstitutionallaw.org/2025/03/31/d...
I went on to say that it is all very well for the Government to make positive noises about the rule of law, but that the real tests will arise when it comes to taking action and spending money. /3
November 26, 2024 at 11:03 PM
I went on to say that it is all very well for the Government to make positive noises about the rule of law, but that the real tests will arise when it comes to taking action and spending money. /3
Last month, the new Attorney General gave a lecture in which he paraded the Government's commitment to the rule of law. That prompted me to observe that the Government would need to put its money where its mouth is by funding a justice system that is falling over. /2
November 26, 2024 at 11:03 PM
Last month, the new Attorney General gave a lecture in which he paraded the Government's commitment to the rule of law. That prompted me to observe that the Government would need to put its money where its mouth is by funding a justice system that is falling over. /2
Nearly 2.6 million signatories now to the petition calling for an immediate general election. Of course, there won't be one — but it should still give pause for thought for those of us who are concerned about the health of democracy in the UK.
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/25/o...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/25/o...
November 26, 2024 at 9:38 AM
Nearly 2.6 million signatories now to the petition calling for an immediate general election. Of course, there won't be one — but it should still give pause for thought for those of us who are concerned about the health of democracy in the UK.
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/25/o...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/25/o...
I explain this point in more detail here. 4/4
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/18/a...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/18/a...
November 24, 2024 at 7:58 PM
I explain this point in more detail here. 4/4
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/18/a...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/18/a...
This is a surprising intervention, in which a former Lord Chancellor asserts that Ministers who are speaking out against the assisted dying bill are 'breaking the rules'. /1
www.theguardian.com/society/2024...
www.theguardian.com/society/2024...
November 24, 2024 at 7:58 PM
This is a surprising intervention, in which a former Lord Chancellor asserts that Ministers who are speaking out against the assisted dying bill are 'breaking the rules'. /1
www.theguardian.com/society/2024...
www.theguardian.com/society/2024...
I address these points in more detail in a recent blogpost, in which I argue that it is necessary to disaggregate views about the merits of assisted dying from concerns about the inadequate process whereby this legislation is being enacted. 6/6
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/18/a...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/18/a...
November 23, 2024 at 11:30 AM
I address these points in more detail in a recent blogpost, in which I argue that it is necessary to disaggregate views about the merits of assisted dying from concerns about the inadequate process whereby this legislation is being enacted. 6/6
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/18/a...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2024/11/18/a...
Not only does suspension of collective responsibility not prevent ministers from speaking out, the Government's own Guide to Making Legislation requires it to set out its view by way of an impact assessment, which it has so far not done. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62fe36... /5
November 23, 2024 at 11:30 AM
Not only does suspension of collective responsibility not prevent ministers from speaking out, the Government's own Guide to Making Legislation requires it to set out its view by way of an impact assessment, which it has so far not done. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62fe36... /5
Expectations of ministerial neutrality arise thanks to the Cabinet Secretary's bizarre directive that ministers cannot speak out because collective responsibility has been suspended — turning on its head the normal consequence (ie allowing ministers to speak their minds) of such suspension. /4
November 23, 2024 at 11:30 AM
Expectations of ministerial neutrality arise thanks to the Cabinet Secretary's bizarre directive that ministers cannot speak out because collective responsibility has been suspended — turning on its head the normal consequence (ie allowing ministers to speak their minds) of such suspension. /4
Second, Leadbeater is 'frustrated' and 'upset' that Cabinet Ministers — such as the Health and Justice Secretaries, to whose portfolios the Bill is directly relevant — have publicly raised concerns about the Bill. There is, however, no good reason why they should not have done so. /3
November 23, 2024 at 11:30 AM
Second, Leadbeater is 'frustrated' and 'upset' that Cabinet Ministers — such as the Health and Justice Secretaries, to whose portfolios the Bill is directly relevant — have publicly raised concerns about the Bill. There is, however, no good reason why they should not have done so. /3
First, Leadbeater mentions the extensive work she has undertaken speaking to different stakeholders. That is laudable. But it cannot replicate the sort of pre-legislative process that could have taken place if legislation was not being enacted in haste as a private members' bill. /2
November 23, 2024 at 11:30 AM
First, Leadbeater mentions the extensive work she has undertaken speaking to different stakeholders. That is laudable. But it cannot replicate the sort of pre-legislative process that could have taken place if legislation was not being enacted in haste as a private members' bill. /2
The @instituteforgov.bsky.social post draws an instructive comparison with the way in which legislation was enacted in the 1980s on assisted conception, which involved careful, expert-led preparation that enabled a wide and lasting consensus to be built on a sensitive issue. /3
November 21, 2024 at 9:35 AM
The @instituteforgov.bsky.social post draws an instructive comparison with the way in which legislation was enacted in the 1980s on assisted conception, which involved careful, expert-led preparation that enabled a wide and lasting consensus to be built on a sensitive issue. /3
This passage captures what is, for me, the key point: that the *pre-legislative* process in relation to Private Members' Bills differs markedly from the processes that can be — and, in some comparable cases, have been — adopted in relation to Government Bills. /2
November 21, 2024 at 9:35 AM
This passage captures what is, for me, the key point: that the *pre-legislative* process in relation to Private Members' Bills differs markedly from the processes that can be — and, in some comparable cases, have been — adopted in relation to Government Bills. /2
Really interesting blogpost highlighting much greater use post-2010 of remedial orders rather than primary legislation to remedy ECHR-incompatible legislation, and highlighting some of the concerns to which that change of practice gives rise.
November 19, 2024 at 1:25 PM
Really interesting blogpost highlighting much greater use post-2010 of remedial orders rather than primary legislation to remedy ECHR-incompatible legislation, and highlighting some of the concerns to which that change of practice gives rise.
The latest report from the Constitution Society's UK Constitution Monitoring Group consoc.org.uk/publications...
November 4, 2024 at 11:13 AM
The latest report from the Constitution Society's UK Constitution Monitoring Group consoc.org.uk/publications...