UK Constitutional Law Association

affiliated to the International Association of Constitutional Law

Weekly round-up of events

This week’s event announcements include:

  1. ‘Justice, Injustice and Brexit’ workshop, City Law School, 19 October 2018
  2. ‘Constitutional Supremacy and Judicial Reasoning: Doctrinal Difficulties in Canada and Abroad’, Policy Exchange, 18 October 2018

~~~

Workshop at City Law School: Justice, Injustice and Brexit

Friday 19th October 2018, 10.15am – 4.00pm

Organisers: 
Tawhida Ahmed and Elaine Fahey, City Law School

Participants:
Tawhida Ahmed, City Law School, City, University of London
Samo Bardutzky, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
David Collins, City Law School, City University of London
Joseph Corkin, Middlesex University, London
Elaine Fahey City Law School, City, University of London
Joelle Grogan, Middlesex University, London
Sabrina Germain, City Law School, City, University of London
Dora Koskakopolou, University of Warwick
Mazen Masri, City Law School, City, University of London
Eva Nanopoulos, Queen Mary, University of London
Paul O’ Connell, SOAS
Samantha VellutiSussex European Institute, University of Sussex
Gabriel Siles-Brugge, University of Warwick
David Seymour, City Law School, City, University of London
Ermioni Xanthapoulou, Brunel Law School, Brunel University, London
Adrienne Yong,  City Law School,  City, University of London

Event Outline
The UK electorate’s referendum vote in favour of leaving the European Union has provoked heated debates on just what kind of impacts Brexit has had, could have, and will further have, for our perspectives on justice and injustice. For some, the calling of a referendum itself was democratically unjust; to others the referendum epitomised the very essence of a just democratic process for both the UK and the European Union more widely.

Likewise, extensive discussions and views continue to be espoused on the pouring of resources into the EU and how this hinders or furthers justice in terms of allocation and redistribution of resources. Relatedly, the justice and injustice of the sharing of these and other resources, amongst British citizens, EU citizens, and others in the UK territory, brings up questions concerning what kind of British, European and indeed global society we want, envisage and, is most just. It brings to the fore, questions about the value and structure of the state, in a world which has, of recent decades, been more vividly constructed as globalist, interconnected, and as being of ‘beyond the state’. It explores the consequences of global governance for justice at national and international levels, as well as vice-versa, the effects of national level ideals of justice on global governance.

This workshop and project undertakes an exploration of ideas of justice and injustice in the context of Brexit. We ask, whose justice is affected by Brexit? What justice is affected by Brexit? What does a just society look like?  Whether Brexit is perceived as one of justice or injustice is related strongly to our perspective on the kind of British, European and global society we want and envisage. The project offers critical reflections upon gender, race, ethnicity, governance, trade, migrants, culture and constitutional law, in the context of Brexit and reflects upon the role of national and international authorities, as well as civil societies. It considers: justices and injustices of Brexit pervade national, European and global spaces, and, being extraordinarily multifaceted in nature, call for pause and renewed reflection on the ways in which models of ‘united in diversity’ can be achieved, if indeed they can be achieved. The event and project also consider concerns around how a ‘just’ Brexit is to be evaluated, including what objective analytical tools are appropriate to evaluate this. It reflects upon the need for objective methodological tools to rigorously analyse and question our understanding of whether and how national and global governance affect the pursuance of a just society.

A programme for the event can be found here.

The website for the event can be found here.

Places are strictly limited and those interested must register interest first with Stephen Hitchcox (S.M.Hitchcox@city.ac.uk) and await confirmation.

~~~

Policy Exchange invites you to hear from

The Hon Justice Bradley W Miller
Court of Appeal for Ontario

on

Constitutional Supremacy and Judicial Reasoning:
Doctrinal Difficulties in Canada and Abroad

with a Vote of Thanks by

The Rt Hon Lord Sumption
Justice of the Supreme Court

Time & Date: Thursday 18th October 2018

12.30 – Registration

13.00 – Event start

14.00 – Event close

Venue: Policy Exchange, 8-10 Great George Street, Westminster, London SW1P 3AE

Judicial reasoning often takes place in circumstances of uncertainty, in which the acts of law-making that are to guide judgment – case law, statutes – are underdetermined. The problem can be particularly acute in constitutional adjudication, where the settlement achieved in constitutional texts may be only partial, and stated at a high level of generality and abstractness that perhaps papered over profound underlying disagreement.  Keeping the constitution supreme is a challenge in the difficult circumstances of incomplete constitutional settlement.

Courts play an important role in taking the commitments that a political community has made through the constitution making process, and using them to craft legal rules that can be applied to particular disputes.  But some constitutional doctrines created by courts, in Canada and elsewhere, are prone to misapplication and provide unintentional support for an outsized role for judges in making constitutional law. This lecture considers two doctrines that have become close to constitutional bedrock but which warrant a closer look: (1) the practice of interpreting a constitutional or quasi-constitutional text as a “living” instrument; and (2) the two-stage structure of constitutional rights, which defines rights broadly and invites states to justify their “violation”.

The Hon Justice Bradley W. Miller was appointed to the Superior Court of Justice in Ontario in January 2015 and was elevated to the Court of Appeal for Ontario in June 2015.  He holds a DPhil from the University of Oxford and practiced commercial and constitutional litigation in Canada with Lerners LLP and Miller Thomson LLP in Toronto.  From 2005-2015, he was a law professor at the University of Western Ontario and  His published work includes the collections The Challenge of Originalism (2011) and Proportionality and the Rule of Law (2014), as well as the co-authored monograph Legislated Rights (2018).

To apply for a place please fill in the form here. You will receive an email if we are able to offer you a place.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Information

This entry was posted on October 12, 2018 by in Events and tagged .
%d bloggers like this: