Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-489z4 Total loading time: 0.448 Render date: 2022-05-19T00:32:09.568Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

2 - Constitutional steps towards judicial independence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2014

Shimon Shetreet
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Sophie Turenne
University of Cambridge
Get access



2.1 The history of judicial independence has been well documented by Robert Stevens. With the purpose of setting the constitutional background to this work, we sketch, over the centuries, the position of the judiciary in relation to the executive and Parliament, before considering the further step towards judicial independence under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA) and the consequences of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). A sense of the existing strains allows us to understand better the concern that the Lord Chancellor’s duty to preserve the independence of the judiciary should be put on statutory footing in the CRA.


2.2 Our brief historical account focuses upon the emergence of the foundations of the modern judiciary in the events of the seventeenth century. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, judges were an integral part of the royal administration and, at the direction of the Crown, performed many administrative duties. To Tudor and early Stuart men the distinction between judicial and administrative duties would have been rather obscure. Holdsworth’s observation that the Chancery was ‘a branch of the civil service as well as a judicial court’ applied in varying degrees to many institutions that we now refer to as ‘courts of law’. As long as the King and Parliament did not come into conflict and did not look to the courts of law for support in the struggle for power, the independence of the judges was not an important issue. Thus, under the Tudors, the issue of judicial independence did not give rise to difficulties. During this period the judges undoubtedly were not independent: they were under strict royal control and the Crown enjoyed their cooperation. Since judges were not sought by the sovereign of the day to be instruments in political struggles, this harmonious cooperation met with popular approval. Similarly, because judges were outside the sphere of politics, very few were removed for political reasons during this period, even though they held office at the King’s (or Queen’s) pleasure.

Judges on Trial
The Independence and Accountability of the English Judiciary
, pp. 21 - 46
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

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.)


Stevens, R., The Independence of the Judiciary. The View from the Lord Chancellor’s Office (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993)Google Scholar
Jones, W.J., Politics and the Bench (London: Allen & Unwin, 1971), pp. 18–19, 21–2, 51–2Google Scholar
Havighurst, A.F., ‘The Judiciary and Politics in the Reign of Charles II’ (1950) 66 LQR 62, 65–6
Holdsworth, W., History of English Law, vol. I, 2nd edn (1937), p. 273, vol. IV, p. 75.
Jones, W.J., Politics and the Bench (London: Allen & Unwin, 1971), 18.Google Scholar
Gardiner, S.R., A Student’s History of England, vol. I, pp. 1–2 (London: Longman, Greens and Co, 1890)Google Scholar
Harding, A., Social History of English Law (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1965), pp. 252–3.Google Scholar
Foss, E., The Judges of England (London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1857), vol. V, pp. 343–4, 370–3Google Scholar
Bowen, C.D., The Lion and the Throne: The Life and Times of Sir Edward Coke 1552–1634 (Boston: Little, Brown, 1957)Google Scholar
McIlwain, C.H., ‘The Tenure of English Judges’ (1913) 7 Am Pol Sci Rev 217, 222
Havighurst, A.F., ‘James II and the Twelve Men in Scarlet’ (1953) 69 LQR 522.
Campbell, J., Lives of the Chief Justices (London: John Murray, 1849), vol. I, pp. 288 and 292.Google Scholar
Haynes, E., Selection and Tenure of Judges (Littleton, Co: Rothman & Co., 1944), p. 77.Google Scholar
Broom, H., Constitutional Law Viewed in Relation to the Common Law and Exemplified by Cases (London: W. Maxwell, 1866), pp. 147–8Google Scholar
Brooke, LJ, ‘Judicial Independence – Its History in England and Wales’, in Cunningham, H. (ed.), Fragile Bastion. Judicial Independence in the Nineties and Beyond (Sidney: Judicial Commission of New South Wales, 1997), pp. 94–5.Google Scholar
Taswell-Langmead, T.P., English Constitutional History, l0th edn by Plucknett, T.F.L. (London: Sweet and Maxwell, 1946), pp. 392n, 430–1Google Scholar
Wade, E.C.S., ‘Consultation of the Judiciary by the Executive’ (1930) 46 LQR 169, 181–2
Medley, D.J., A Student’s Manual of English Constitutional History (Oxford: Blackwell, 1894), p. 488.Google Scholar
Hearn, W.E., The Government of England: its Structure and its Development, 2nd edn (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1886), p. 79.Google Scholar
Anson, T.R.S., The Law and Custom of the Constitution, 3rd edn (Oxford: Clarendon, 1907), vol. I, p. 30.Google Scholar
Bacon, F., ‘Essays: Of Judicature’, in Spedding, J., Ellis, R.. and Heath, D. (eds.), Works of Francis Bacon (New York: Hurd and Houghton, 1861 reprint), vol. VI, pp. 506 and 510.Google Scholar
Keir, D.L., ‘The Case of Ship Money’ (1936) 52 LQR 546
Hatsell, J., Precedents of Proceedings in the House of Commons, with Observations (London: Printed for L. Hansard and Sons, 1818), vol. IV, pp. 139 et seq.Google Scholar
Campbell, , Lives, vol. I, 509–510 (1849)
Kenyon, J. P., The Stuart Constitution (Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 445.Google Scholar
Havighurst, A.F., ‘The Judiciary and Politics in the Reign of Charles II’ (1950) 66 LQR 62, 65.
Birkenhead, , Points of View (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1922), vol. II, pp. 159–61Google Scholar
Cecil, H., Tipping the Scales (London: Hutchinson, 1964), p. 26Google Scholar
Thomson, M.A., A Constitutional History of England. 1642–1801 (London: Methuen, 1938), p. 282.Google Scholar
Hallam, H., The Constitutional History of England from the Accession of Henry VII to the Death of George II, 5th edn (London: John Murray, 1846), vol. II, p. 357.Google Scholar
Mathew, T., For Lawyers and Others (London: Hodge, 1938), pp. 71–87Google Scholar
Keeton, G., ‘The Judiciary and the Constitutional Struggle 1660–88’ (1962) 7 J Pub Teach Law 56
Heuston, R.F.V., Lives of the Lord Chancellors (1885–1940) (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964), p. 39.Google Scholar
Brougham, , Present State of the Law: the Speech of Henry Brougham, Esq, MP, in the House of Commons on Thursday February 7 1828 (London: Henry Colburn, 1828), p. 20Google Scholar
May, Erskine, The Constitutional History of England, edited and continued by Holland, F. (London: Longman, Greens, 1912), pp. 75–6.Google Scholar
Todd, A., On Parliamentary Government in England: its Origin, Development and Practical Operation (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1867–69), vol. II, p. 157.Google Scholar
Foord, A., Her Majesty’s Opposition 1714–1830 (Oxford University Press, 1964).Google Scholar
Hatsell, , Precedents, 3rd edn (1796), vol. II, 26–9
Le Sueur, A., ‘The Conception of the UK’s New Supreme Court’, in Le Sueur, A. (ed.), Building the UK’s New Supreme Court (Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 4Google Scholar
Steyn, , ‘The Case for a Supreme Court’ (2002) LQR 382.
Le Sueur, A., ‘From Appellate Committee to Supreme Court: A Narrative’, in Blom-Cooper, L., Dickson, B. and Drewry, G. (eds.), The Judicial House of Lords 1876–2009 (Oxford University Press, 2009), chapter 5Google Scholar
Bingham, T., ‘The Human Rights Act’ (2010) European Human Rights Law Review 568, 570Google Scholar
Bamforth, N., ‘Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Human Rights Act 1998’ [1998] PL 572
O’Cinneide, C., Human Rights and the UK Constitution (London: British Academy Policy Centre, 2012).Google Scholar
Feldman, D., ‘Human Rights, Terrorism and Risk: the Roles of Politicians and Judges’ [2006] PL 364, 375
Allan, T.R.S, ‘Human Rights Act in Constitutional Perspective’ (2006) 59 CLP 27, p. 36.
Bradley, A., ‘The Sovereignty of Parliament – Form or Substance ?’, in Jowell, J. and Olivier, D. (eds.), The Changing Constitution, 7th edn (Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 34 and 37.Google Scholar
Hale, , ‘The Supreme Court in the UK Constitution’, Legal Wales (12 October 2012).
Himsworth, C., ‘Case Comment’ [2012] PL 205, 213.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats