ASSIGNMENT BRIEF

QUALIFICATION UNIT NUMBER AND TITLE

PEARSON BTEC HND IN LAW (SRF) 03. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (LEVEL 4)

INTERNAL VERIFIER UNIT TUTOR

MEHAK ZARAQ

DATE ISSUED SUBMISSION DATE RESUBMISSION DATE

ASSIGNMENT TITLE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES AND LAWS OF UK

LEARNING OUTCOME AND ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

PASS MERIT DISTINCTION

LO1 EXPLORE THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF UK CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

P1 EXPLAIN PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY IN

THE CONTEXT OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE
CONSTITUTION. M1 ANALYSE THE PRINCIPLES OF
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, WITH REFERENCE TO
P2 EXAMINE THE EXTENT TO WHICH LO1 & LO2
RELEVANT CASE LAW.
SEPARATION OF POWERS UPHOLDS THE RULE OF D1 CRITICALLY ANALYSE THE RELATIONSHIP
LAW BETWEEN THE PRINCIPLES OF CONSTITUTIONAL
LAW AND THE DIFFUSION OF POWER TO
LO2 EXPLAIN THE STRUCTURE, COMPOSITION AND FUNCTION OF UK GOVERNMENT DEVOLVED AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

P3 EXPLAIN THE STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF

GOVERNMENT. M2 ANALYSE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT AND DEVOLVED AND
P4 EXPLAIN DEVOLUTION AND LOCAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
GOVERNMENT IN ENGLAND AND WALES.

LO3 ASSESS THE ROLE, COMPOSITION AND FUNCTION OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

P5 DISCUSS THE COMPOSITION AND FUNCTION

OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. M3 EVALUATE THE ROLE OF THE HOUSE OF
COMMONS TO MAKE LAWS, SCRUTINISE BILLS
P6 REVIEW THE ROLE OF THE HOUSE OF AND HOLD THE EXECUTIVE TO ACCOUNT.
COMMONS IN PARLIAMENTARY LAW MAKING LO3 & LO4
D2 CRITICALLY EVALUATE THE ROLE AND
LO4 EXAMINE THE STRUCTURE, COMPOSITION AND FUNCTION OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS FUNCTION OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AND
THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
P7 DISCUSS THE COMPOSITION AND FUNCTION
OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
M4 EVALUATE THE REFORM AND PROPOSALS
P8 DISCUSS THE IMPACT OF THE PARLIAMENT FOR REFORM OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
ACTS 1911 AND 1949 ON THE ROLE OF THE
HOUSE OF LORDS.

SUBMISSION FORMAT
THE SUBMISSION IS IN THE FORM OF 5 ESSAYS.
THE ESSAYS WILL BE IN THE FORM OF AN INTRODUCTION, BODY PARAGRAPHS AND A CONCLUSION. YOU NEED TO USE SINGLE SPACING AND FONT STYLE
TIMES NEW ROMAN, SIZE 11. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN EACH CASE SEPARATELY, USING THE GUIDANCE PROVIDED. ALL WORK MUST BE
SUPPORTED WITH RESEARCH AND REFERENCED USING THE OSCOLA REFERENCING SYSTEM. THE WORD LIMIT IS SPECIFIED.

ASSIGNMENT SCENARIO AND GUIDANCE

You have gained a 3-month internship placement at the Youth Parliament Centre. Due to Covid-19 restrictions the internship is taking
place online. The Centre will consider the best two candidates for full-time research positions. For purposes of the internship and
evaluation, they have asked you to research and apply your knowledge in the following:
PART A
1. In the case of McGonnell v UK, which concerned overlapping judicial, legislative and executive functions by the same
authority, the Bailiff of Guernsey, the question that arose was not misuse of power but that the judicial and executive
powers should not be held by one person or authority. This decision by the ECtHR led the need to make constitutional
reforms regarding the strict rule of separation of powers. Critically evaluate how separation of powers upholds the rule of
law and other constitutional principles in the Westminster model. (LO1, P2, M1)
2. Has the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) had any effect on the sovereignty of Parliament? (LO1, P1, M1)
Part B
3. Brigid Hadfield has observed that ‘England is the only UK nation all of whose laws are made and all of whose policies are
formulated by a UK body and never by a solely English-elected body’ ((2005) PL 286, 291). Discuss the structure of the UK
government and critically evaluate whether devolution has transformed Westminster into a quasi-federal Parliament. (LO2)
Part C
4. ‘Before the formally dramatic part of the legislative process even begins, almost all the terms of almost all (government) Bills
are settled’ (Calvert). Would you agree that the House of Commons is redundant as a legislative body? (LO3)
PART D
5. Explain the legislative functions and powers of the House of Lords and critically evaluate on whether the Parliament Acts
1911 and 1949 are in need of any amendment and reform. (LO4)

PART A – GUIDANCE

1) Student should discuss the emergence of the doctrine of SOP in historical terms but stress that Montesquieu’s conception is
based on an idealized English constitution. At the very least, the historic incongruity of the doctrine in the UK constitution needs
to be brought out. A very good answer would show that SOP is enjoying a renaissance in the UK and point to recent
constitutional developments (CRA 2005; reformed Lord Chancellor; UKSC). Other cases to briefly discuss: Anderson; Matthews;
Duport Steels; Fire Brigades Union) as well as contemporary literature to be considered such as the cases under Human Rights
Act 1998
Essentially, the following matters should be discussed:
 the concept of the rule of law as put forward by Dicey;
 the extent to which the rule of law finds expression in the constitution;
 the doctrine of the separation of powers as propounded by Montesquieu;
 instances in which the doctrine is breached or observed.
 the impact of the HRA and the Constitutional Reform Act on both of the above;
 critical evaluation of the impact of separation of powers on rule of Law (P2, M1)
2) It is a tricky question because, on its face, the simple answer to the question is ‘no’, it being clear that the HRA has, formally
speaking, carefully preserved the traditional doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty; however, a good answer would go
considerably further than simply explaining this.
The following issues should be addressed: (P1, M1)
 The traditional doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty – Parliament cannot bind its successors;
 The ways in which the HRA preserves this – ss 4(6) and 3(2);
 The evidence that Parliament can apparently limit itself at least as to form – the courts’ response to the European
Communities Act 1972; the contrary analysis of Thoburn (2002);
  The argument that s 3 of the HRA, as interpreted, can amount to the suspension of implied repeal;
 The significance of s 19 in avoiding legislative infringements of the Convention;

PART B- GUIDANCE

A brief explanation of the UK government and functions of the different components need to be discussed in context to devolution.
(P3) Analysis of the relationship between the central governments and devolved governments need to be analysed. The main
differences between federalism (one size fits all) and devolution (tailored and asymmetric) in context to UK should be analysed (M2)
Adequate answers will explain the overall scheme for devolution and give an account of the powers of the Scottish Parliament,
National Assembly for Wales and Northern Ireland Assembly as well as the odd position of England. (P4)
For effective critical analysis the impact of devolution on parliamentary sovereignty; whether further devolution might be a
steppingstone towards the break-up of the United Kingdom should be explored. Analyzing the constitutional principles, the following
questioned should be illustrated in the answer: Is federalism an option? What else could happen to the UK? A good answer to this
question would… provide nuanced alternatives to federalism.? Are the devolution Acts ‘constitutional statutes’? Are they, more
fundamentally, ‘constitutions’ for the regions? In what ways does the Northern Ireland settlement differ from the other devolutionary
schemes established in 1998? Does the Scotland Act 2016 provide the basis for ‘an enduring settlement’? How has the UK Supreme
Court approached the task of interpreting the devolution Acts? (D1)
Law cases, reports and other references the examiners would expect you to use: The devolution of Scotland (Scotland Act 1998 and
Scotland Act 2016), Wales (Government of Wales Act 2006 and Wales Act 2017) and Northern Ireland (Northern Ireland Act 1998).
Devolution to local government, that is the transfer of powers and funding from national to local government.

PART C- GUIDANCE

This question demands a critical assessment of the effectiveness of the House of Commons in its role as a legislative body. This answer
should confine itself to the Commons’ control over legislation; scrutiny of the Executive through, for example, select committees is
not relevant here.
Learners should note that there is an implied presumption behind the question, namely, that if the House cannot often alter
government Bills, it may be ‘redundant’. This presumption must be challenged by the learner because it is of rather more interest to
discuss what the House should be aiming to achieve rather than what it actually does achieve, although an analysis of the latter is
clearly crucial in the answer.
Essentially, the following areas should be covered:
 a brief discussion on the composition and function of the house of Commons (P5)
 Discussion of the doctrine of the separation of powers and the basic charge against the Commons of failure to control
legislation;(M3)
 illustrations of government omnipotence and an explanation of how this is achieved – whips and government majority
coupled with an indication of the legislative process; examples from the Blair government;(P6)
 the argument that the Commons’ role lies in scrutiny; the issue of publicity; (D2)
 an analysis of effectiveness in this field; the curtailment of scrutiny by guillotine, closure and programming; (P6, M3)
 scrutiny of delegated legislation; the greater recent use of pre-legislative
 scrutiny; (M3)
 conclusion – does the Commons perform an important function? (D2)

PART D- GUIDANCE

(LO4)
 Critically assess the purpose of the House of Lords is to act as a check on the House of Commons and to provide an
opportunity for second thoughts (D2). But it is an unusual second chamber and some politicians are calling for it to be
reformed (M4). This question would discuss not only the functions but also the purpose of a second chamber (P7). What is
its constitutional role? Is a second chamber necessary? (D2) If so, should the HL be reformed to be more representative?
(M4) What happens if the HC and HL disagree? (P8) The HL once had the power of veto but now only has a power of delay
(Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949). It is a revising rather than rival chamber. The numerous consultations, government
papers, and reports should be discussed (M4). Why is reform of the HL proving so difficult? (M4) A very good answer would
discuss the HL retention of legal veto over secondary legislation: recent controversy, leading the Strathclyde Review and
proposals for removal of veto.(M4) Poor answers to this question… are limited in a descriptive sense and do not discuss HL
reform Law cases, reports and other references. The assessors would expect you to use Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949;
House of Lords Act 1999; Wakeham Report 2000; White Paper on House of Lords Reform 2007; Salisbury-Addison
 Convention. Jackson v Attorney General.

EVIDENCE CHECKLIST SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE REQUIRED BY STUDENT

1. Essay (1500-2000 words)

PART A
2. Essay (1000-1200 words)

PART B 3. Essay (1500-2000 words)

PART C 4. Essay (1500-2000 words)

PART D 5. Essay (1500-2000 words)