Share it

Congratulations to the winner of the UKSC blog’s essay competition, Edward Granger!

Edward’s essay on why AXA General Insurance Ltd & Others v Lord Advocate & Others (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 46 is the most important Supreme Court case to date will be posted on the blog along with the essays from our two runners-up, Jack Torbet and Jamie Dunne, over the next week.

Thanks for all your entries – the blog team were overwhelmed with the quantity and quality of this year’s entries. Who knew that essays on the UK Supreme Court could touch on subjects as wide-ranging as empty teacups, Chinese pandas and Banthas (we admit, we had to look the last one up, and found a wealth of useful information here).

We were also delighted to see such originality in some of the entries. Particular mention goes to Ashley Halvorsen for this drawing representing the restrictions to the Supreme Court’s independence:

 

And we leave you with an extract from Sanjeev Kumar’s Socratic-style dialogue on the independence of the Supreme Court, featuring the characters Miss Judiciary, Sir Executive and Mr. Legislature:

Sir Executive: Miss Judiciary, it is often said, the UK Supreme Court is not independent.

Miss Judiciary: In which way?

Sir Executive: Oh, you know, backstreet dealing, cash-for-judgments, that kind of thing.

Miss Judiciary: That’s a perfect description, I must say: for members of Parliament.

Mr. Legislature: Hey, I’m a member of Parliament, and I’ll have you know I only take cash-for-questions where the sum offered exceeds £3,000, thank you very much. I only take cash-for-questions now and then. Not all the time though. That makes it okay.

Miss Judiciary turns towards Sir Executive.

Miss Judiciary: Where are we now?

Sir Executive: InWestminster.

Miss Judiciary: But, where inWestminster?

Sir Executive: Inside theUK Supreme Court.

Miss Judiciary: Correct! We, Justices of the Peace, have our own area where we uphold the law. We are no longer bound to Parliament.

Sir Executive: Oh. The difference is one of separation. To fool the common folk you see. I can peep through the windows of the Houses of Parliament and see the Supreme Court. It doesn’t make the Supreme Court any more independent.

Miss Judiciary: Well, apart from the cosmetic change, I think you will find it does.

Sir Executive: How so?

Mr. Legislature: Yeah, miss, how does it affect it?

Sir Executive: Remember, Mr. Legislature your not here to ask questions but only to passively pass laws. Don’t forget it.

Mr. Legislature dramatically looks away; his disgust visible for all to see.