Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-thh2z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T01:21:36.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Colleges in the University of Cambridge

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2009

P. R. Glazebrook
Get access

Extract

Are the Cambridge colleges “constituent colleges” of the University? This seemingly esoteric question has recently become of some practical importance. University Commissioners, appointed Pursuant to section 202(1) of the Education Reform Act 1988, have the duty of modifying the Statues or other instruments of government, of many, but not all, university institutions, so as to ensure that, whatever may have been the position hitherto, each of them has, for all future appointments, the power to dismiss members of its “academic staff” on grounds of redundancy, or for “good cause” (as defined in section 203(2)). Whether a university institution is subject to having its Statutes thus modified in ways which it might not have chosen for itself, in order to facilitate the “restructuring” of its academic activities, and the removal of “dead wood,” turns on whether it is a “qualifying institution,” as defined in section 202(3):

(a) any university or other institution to which during the period of three years beginning 1 August 1987, grants in aid are or have been made by the Universities Funding Council, or by the Secretary of State acting on the advice of the University Grants Committee;

(b) any constituent college, school or hall or other institution of a university falling within paragraph (a) above.

Type
Articles
Information
The Cambridge Law Journal , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , September 1993 , pp. 501 - 505
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 To which my attention was first directed by remarks of my colleagues DrLowe, A.V. and DrSimmonds, N.E., Fellows of Corpus Christi College.Google Scholar

2 The Act phrases it more blandly: enabling “qualifying institutions to provide education, promote learning and engage in research efficiently and economically” (s. 202(2)(6)).

3 Letter of SirMay, John, Chairman of the University Commissioners, to the author, of 12 May 1993.Google Scholar

4 Williams, J., The Law of the Universities (London 1910), pp. 116–117.Google Scholar

5 Which has two categories of college: “maintained” and “recognised” (Durham University Statute 14).Google Scholar

6 Defined, for the purposes of the Cambridge University and Corporation Act 1894 (57 & 58 Vict, c. lx), in sections 4 and 6; see also the Cambridge Award Act 1856 (19 & 20 Vict. c. 17) s. 6. These statutes and all the earlier legislation arc reprinted in Shadwell, L.L.. Enactments in Parliament specially concerning the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. 4 vols. (Oxford 1912)Google Scholar. For the background, Holdsworth, W.S., A History of English Law, vol. i (7th ed.) (London 1956), pp. 165–176Google Scholar; and Winstanlcy, D.A., Early Victorian Cambridge (Cambridge 1940). ch. VIIIGoogle Scholar; ibid.. Later Victorian Cambridge (Cambridge 1947), ch. IV. The precincts of the University, being nowadays a matter of concern only to its members, arc currently defined by Ordinance made under Statute K. 3(i).Google Scholar

7 1978 Act, Preamble, para. 4.Google Scholar

8 Ibid., para. 6.

9 Ibid., para. 16.

10 See note 3, above.

11 13Eliz, I, cap. 29.Google Scholar

12 John, Pope XXII's bull of 1318.Google Scholar

13 Statute, G.Google Scholar

14 Glazebrook, , “University and College Statutes and the Privy Council” (1976) XCVIH The Cambridge Review 165–168.Google Scholar