Show Summary Details
Public LawText, Cases, and Materials

Public Law: Text, Cases, and Materials (4th edn)

Andrew Le Sueur, Maurice Sunkin, and Jo Eric Khushal Murkens
Page of

Printed from Oxford Law Trove. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 01 December 2023

15. p. 444Case Study: Constitutionally Contested Legislationlocked

15. p. 444Case Study: Constitutionally Contested Legislationlocked

  • Andrew Le Sueur, Andrew Le SueurProfessor of Constitutional Justice, University of Essex
  • Maurice SunkinMaurice SunkinProfessor of Public Law and Socio-Legal Studies, University of Essex
  •  and Jo Eric Khushal MurkensJo Eric Khushal MurkensAssociate Professor of Law, London School of Economics and Political Science


This chapter looks at the circumstances surrounding two events. The first is the 2005 decision of the UK Parliament to set up a committee to examine whether the constitutional conventions governing the relationship between the House of Lords and the House of Commons should be codified. The second is the decision of the Commons (and the Labour government) to press ahead and present the Hunting Bill 2004 for royal assent despite the opposition of the Lords to the policy of a total ban on hunting wild animals with dogs; the Lords preferred a policy of licensed hunting.

You do not currently have access to this chapter

Sign in

Please sign in to access the full content.


Access to the full content requires a subscription