Constitutional Conventions and the P rince of W ales

The U pper T ribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) held in Evans v Information Commissioner that certain correspondence between P rince C harles and government officials must be disclosed under freedom of information legislation. Much of the judgment was devoted to a discussion of the constitutional conventions applicable to P rince C harles, and the case provides a useful example of how conventions and laws can interact. In this note, I argue that the U pper T ribunal misunderstood how conventions are distinguished from one another, and misapplied the test for the identification of conventions

Biology · Botany · Government (linguistics) · Identification (biology) · Law and economics · Legislation · Linguistics · Political science · Sociology · Test (biology) · International Arbitration and Investment Law · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Ombudsman and Human Rights · Philosophy

• Constitutional Conventions

  David Hopkins, Geoffrey Marshall•Landowners, capitalists, and…•1987

  Añadir item

• Practical Reason and Norms

  Joseph Raz•Practical Reason and Norms•1999

  Añadir item

• Social Conventions

  Andrei Marmor•Social Conventions•2009

  Añadir item