The Case Of Burmah Oil Ltd V Lord Advocate

2304 Words10 Pages
Parliamentary sovereignty translates to the fact that parliament can pass any law subject to rules of statutory interpretation. This means that Parliament is the supreme law making body in the UK and therefore has the ability to make any laws based on any affair. As a result, British courts are bound to enforce these laws and can not question their effectiveness or legitimacy. Regardless of whether a law passed by Parliament withdraws citizen’s civil rights and/or chooses to imprison citizens without trial, courts can not justify these actions as unlawful. In a real world situation though, Parliament is strains to pass laws that will aid practical situations such as political expedience and the enforceability of draconian laws. A powerful example of this can be found with the famous case of Burmah Oil Ltd vs Lord Advocate [1964]. The case was brought forward due to the total or partial destruction of property and assets belonging to the company, which were situated in Burma, due to orders followed from H.M. Government in the United Kingdom during the Second World War. With the outcome of the case, Parliament immediately passed the War Damage Act of 1965 stating that the crown was never before nor had been under any such form of responsibility to compensate for damaged assets or property. In the year of 1973, the UK became a member of EU and thus surrendered part of its sovereignty. As a result, in order to accommodate EU law into English law Parliament developed the European

More about The Case Of Burmah Oil Ltd V Lord Advocate

Get Access