Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution: Albert Venn Dicey [1915]

advtanmoy 18/01/2020

Albert Venn Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution [1915]

 Table of Contents:

 

  • CONTENTS
  • I
  • II
  • PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION
  • PREFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION
  • INTRODUCTION
  • AIM
  • SOVEREIGNTY OF PARLIAMENT
  • POSSIBLE CHANGE IN CONSTITUTION OR CHARACTER OF THE PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGN (EFFECT OF THE PARLIAMENT ACT, 1911)
  • THE STATE OF THINGS IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE PASSING OF THE PARLIAMENT ACT
  • THE DIRECT EFFECTS OF THE PARLIAMENT ACT
  • PRACTICAL CHANGE IN THE AREA OF PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY (RELATION OF THE IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT TO THE DOMINIONS)
  • First Question
  • Rule 1
  • Rule 2
  • Rule 3
  • Rule 4
  • Second Question
  • THE RULE OF LAW
  • DECLINE IN REVERENCE FOR RULE OF LAW
  • Legislation
  • Distrust of Judges and of Courts
  • Lawlessness
  • COMPARISON BETWEEN THE PRESENT OFFICIAL LAW OF ENGLAND AND THE PRESENT DROIT ADMINISTRATIF OF FRANCE
  • CONVENTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION
  • FIRST QUESTION
  • ANSWER
  • MERE CONVENTIONS
  • ENACTED CONVENTIONS
  • SECOND QUESTION
  • ANSWER
  • THIRD QUESTION
  • ANSWER
  • DEVELOPMENT DURING THE LAST THIRTY YEARS OF NEW CONSTITUTIONAL IDEAS
  • TWO GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
  • First Observation
  • Second Observation
  • CRITICISM OF EACH OF THE FOUR NEW CONSTITUTIONAL IDEAS
  • Woman Suffrage
  • The Causes
  • The Main Lines of Argument
  • First Argument
  • Answer
  • Second Argument
  • Answer
  • Proportional Representation
  • First Proposition
  • Second Proposition
  • Third Proposition
  • Objections to the Third Proposition
  • Second Objection
  • Third Objection
  • Federalism
  • Leading Characteristics of Federal Government
  • The Characteristics of Federal Government in Relation to Imperial Federalism
  • Characteristics of Federal Government in Relation to Home Rule All Round
  • The Referendum
  • The Causes
  • The Main Argument Against the Referendum
  • The Main Argument in Favour of the Referendum
  • CONCLUSIONS
  • OUTLINE OF SUBJECT
  • THE TRUE NATURE OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
  • PART I: THE SOVEREIGNTY OF PARLIAMENT
    • Chapter I: THE NATURE OF PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY
    • NATURE OF PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY
    • Unlimited Legislative Authority of Parliament
    • The Absence of Any Competing Legislative Power
    • ALLEGED LEGAL LIMITATIONS ON THE LEGISLATIVE SOVEREIGNTY OF PARLIAMENT
    • DIFFICULTIES AS TO THE DOCTRINE OF PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY
    • Chapter II: PARLIAMENT AND NON-SOVEREIGN LAW-MAKING BODIES
    • CHARACTERISTICS OF SOVEREIGN PARLIAMENT
    • CHARACTERISTICS OF NON-SOVEREIGN LAW-MAKING BODIES
    • Subordinate Law-making Bodies
    • Foreign Non-sovereign Legislatures
    • Chapter III: PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY AND FEDERALISM
  • PART II: THE RULE OF LAW
    • Chapter IV: THE RULE OF LAW: ITS NATURE AND GENERAL APPLICATIONS
    • Chapter V: THE RIGHT TO PERSONAL FREEDOM
    • REDRESS FOR ARREST
    • WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
    • Nature of Writ
    • The Habeas Corpus Acts
    • Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act
    • An Act of Indemnity
    • Chapter VI: THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF DISCUSSION
    • Chapter VII: THE RIGHT OF PUBLIC MEETING1
    • FIRST LIMITATION
    • SECOND LIMITATION
    • Chapter VIII: MARTIAL LAW
    • Chapter IX: THE ARMY
    • THE STANDING ARMY
    • A SOLDIER’S POSITION AS A CITIZEN
    • A SOLDIER’S POSITION AS A MEMBER OF THE ARMY
    • THE TERRITORIAL FORCE
    • Chapter X: THE REVENUE1
    • SOURCE OF PUBLIC REVENUE
    • AUTHORITY FOR EXPENDING REVENUE
    • SECURITY FOR THE PROPER APPROPRIATION OF THE REVENUE
    • Chapter XI: THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MINISTERS
    • Chapter XII: RULE OF LAW COMPARED WITH DROIT ADMINISTRATIF
    • FIRST PERIOD: NAPOLEON AND THE RESTORATION, 1800–1830
    • SECOND PERIOD: THE ORLEANS MONARCHY AND THE SECOND EMPIRE 1830–187030
    • THIRD PERIOD: THE THIRD REPUBLIC, 1870–1908
    • The Period of Unnoticed Growth, 1800–18 (Période D’élaboration Secréte)
    • The Period of Publication, 1818–60 (Période de Divulgation)
    • The Period of Organisation, 1860–1908 (Période d’Organisation)
    • Chapter XIII: RELATION BETWEEN PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY AND THE RULE OF LAW
  • PART III: THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE LAW OF THE CONSTITUTION AND THE CONVENTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION
    • Chapter XIV: NATURE OF CONVENTIONS OF CONSTITUTION
    • Chapter XV: THE SANCTION BY WHICH THE CONVENTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION ARE ENFORCED

 

  • APPENDIX
  • Note I: RIGIDITY OF FRENCH CONSTITUTIONS
  • Note II: DIVISION OF POWERS IN FEDERAL STATES
  • THE UNITED STATES
  • THE SWISS CONFEDERATION
  • THE CANADIAN DOMINION
  • THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
  • THE GERMAN EMPIRE
  • Note III: DISTINCTION BETWEEN A PARUAMENTARY EXECUTIVE AND A NON-PARLIAMENTARY EXECUTIVE
  • Note IV: THE RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENCE
  • FIRST THEORY
  • SECOND THEORY
  • Note V: QUESTIONS CONNECTED WITH THE RIGHT OF PUBLIC MEETING
  • DOES THERE EXIST ANY GENERAL RIGHT OF MEETING IN PUBLIC PLACES?
  • WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE TERM “AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY”?
  • WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS OF THE CROWN OR ITS SERVANTS IN DEALING WITH AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY?
  • WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS POSSESSED BY THE MEMBERS OF A LAWFUL ASSEMBLY WHEN THE MEETING IS INTERFERED WITH OR DISPERSED BY FORCE?
  • Note VI: DUTY OF SOLDIERS CALLED UPON TO DISPERSE AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY
  • Note VII: THE MEANING OF AN “UNCONSTITUTIONAL” LAW
  • Note VIII: SWISS FEDERALISM89
  • THE FEDERAL COUNCIL
  • THE FEDERAL ASSEMBLY
  • THE FEDERAL TRIBUNAL
  • THE REFERENDUM
  • Note IX: AUSTRALIAN FEDERALISM101
  • FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
  • THE PARLIAMENTARY EXECUTIVE
  • AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION
  • MAINTENANCE OF THE RELATION WITH THE UNITED KINGDOM
  • Note X: MARTIAL LAW IN ENGLAND DURING TIME OF WAR OR INSURRECTION121
  • NATURE OF MARTIAL LAW
  • CONCLUSIONS
  • OTHER DOCTRINES WITH REGARD TO MARTIAL LAW
  • The Doctrine of the Prerogative
  • The Doctrine of Immunity
  • The Doctrine of Political Necessity or Expediency154
  • Note XI: CONSTITUTION OF THE TRIBUNAL DES CONFLITS
  • Note XII: PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE CROWN
  • AS TO BREACH OF CONTRACT
  • AS TO WRONGS
  • Note XIII: PARLIAMENT ACT, 1911 [I & 2 Geo. 5. Ch. Ch. 13.]

 

  • INDEX

Next Post

ALL News Headlines 2020 January 18TH

Sat Jan 18 , 2020
Kapil Sibal: No state can deny the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act(CAA) when it is already passed by the Parliament, said Congress leader Kapil Sibal on Saturday. “If the CAA is passed no state can say ‘I will not implement it’. It is not possible and is unconstitutional. You can oppose it, you can pass a resolution in the Assembly and ask the central government to withdraw it. But constitutionally saying that I won’t implement it is going to be problematic and going to create more difficulties,” said the former minister of law and justice on the third day of the Kerala Literature Festival (KLF).

You May Like

  • A judge is the pillar of entire justice system and public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from a judge (SC-10/12/2019) - A person discharging judicial duties acts on behalf of the State in discharge of its sovereign functions. Dispensation of justice is not only an onerous duty but has been considered as akin to discharge of a pious duty, and therefore, is a very serious matter. The standards of probity, conduct, integrity that may be relevant for discharge of duties by a careerist in another job cannot be the same for a judicial officer. A judge holds the office of a public trust. Impeccable integrity, unimpeachable independence with moral values embodied to the core are absolute imperatives which brooks no compromise. A judge is the pillar of the entire justice system and the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function. Judges must strive for the highest standards of integrity in both their professional and personal lives.
  • A daughter has no right u/s 14 of Hindu Succession Act of her father’s property if it is occupied by her brother through adverse possession (SC-28/08/2023) - A Hindu daughter has no right u/s 14 of Hindu Succession Act on the property of her father if it is occupied by her brother through adverse possession (SC-28/08/2023)- [See Pritam Singh v. State, AIR (1950) SC 169: (1950) SCR 453, Hem Raj v. State of Ajmer AIR (1954) SC 462: (1954) SCR 1133, Bengal Chemical & Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Employees, AIR (1959) SC 633: 1959 Supp (2) SCR 136: (1959) 1 LLJ 413, Municipal Board, Pratabgarh and Anr. v. Mahendra Singh Chawla and Ors. (1982) 3 SCC 331: (1983) SCC (L&S) 19, Taherakhatoon (dead) by LRs v. Salambin Mohammad (1999) 2 SCC 635]

Jurisprudence

Recent Updates

%d bloggers like this: