triplets
list | passage
stringlengths 6
20.1k
| __index_level_0__
int64 0
834
|
|---|---|---|
[
"Greater London Authority Act 1999",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Greater London Authority Act 1999 (c. 29) is the Act of Parliament that established the Greater London Authority, the London Assembly and the Mayor of London.Background
The Act was brought in after a referendum was held under the Greater London Authority (Referendum) Act 1998 (c. 3). The referendum question was: 'Are you in favour of the Government's proposals for a Greater London Authority, made up of an elected mayor and a separately elected assembly?' The Yes vote was 72.01%, the No vote was 27.99%.
| 4
|
[
"Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which abolished the death penalty for murder in Northern Ireland, and established the Diplock courts in which terrorist offences were tried by a judge without a jury. It has mostly been repealed, the anti-terrorism provisions having been superseded by subsequent legislation. The death penalty had not been used in Northern Ireland since 1961, when Robert McGladdery was hanged.
The Act banned membership under penalty of law in the following organisations:
| 0
|
[
"Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which abolished the death penalty for murder in Northern Ireland, and established the Diplock courts in which terrorist offences were tried by a judge without a jury. It has mostly been repealed, the anti-terrorism provisions having been superseded by subsequent legislation. The death penalty had not been used in Northern Ireland since 1961, when Robert McGladdery was hanged.
The Act banned membership under penalty of law in the following organisations:
| 1
|
[
"Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which abolished the death penalty for murder in Northern Ireland, and established the Diplock courts in which terrorist offences were tried by a judge without a jury. It has mostly been repealed, the anti-terrorism provisions having been superseded by subsequent legislation. The death penalty had not been used in Northern Ireland since 1961, when Robert McGladdery was hanged.
The Act banned membership under penalty of law in the following organisations:
| 3
|
[
"Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which abolished the death penalty for murder in Northern Ireland, and established the Diplock courts in which terrorist offences were tried by a judge without a jury. It has mostly been repealed, the anti-terrorism provisions having been superseded by subsequent legislation. The death penalty had not been used in Northern Ireland since 1961, when Robert McGladdery was hanged.
The Act banned membership under penalty of law in the following organisations:
| 4
|
[
"Canada Act 1982",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"Canada"
] |
The Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11; French: Loi de 1982 sur le Canada) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and one of the enactments which make up the Constitution of Canada. It was enacted at the request of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada to patriate Canada's constitution, ending the power of the British Parliament to amend the constitution. The act also formally ended the "request and consent" provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 in relation to Canada, whereby the British parliament had a general power to pass laws extending to Canada at its own request.
Annexed as Schedule B to the act is the text of the Constitution Act, 1982, in both of Canada's official languages (i.e. English and French). Because of the requirements of official bilingualism, the body of the Canada Act itself is also set out in French in Schedule A to the act, which is declared by s. 3 to have "the same authority in Canada as the English version thereof".Enactment
The Canada Act 1982 was passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in response to the request from the Canadian Senate and House of Commons to end Britain's authority and transfer the authority for amending the Constitution of Canada to the federal and provincial governments. After unpromising negotiations with the provincial governments, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau announced that the federal government would unilaterally patriate the Constitution from Britain. Manitoba, Newfoundland and Quebec responded by posing references to the provincial courts of appeal, challenging the federal government's power to seek unilateral amendments from Britain. In September 1981, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in the Patriation Reference that provincial consent was not legally necessary, but to do so without substantial consent would be contrary to a longstanding constitutional convention. Trudeau succeeded in convincing nine provinces out of ten to consent to patriation by agreeing to the addition of a Notwithstanding Clause to limit the application of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a result of discussions during a First Ministers' conference and other minor changes in November 1981.In the UK, 44 members of Parliament voted against the act, including 24 Conservative and 16 Labour MPs, citing concerns over Canada's past mistreatment of Quebec and Indigenous peoples (as recalled with frustration by Jean Chrétien in his memoirs Straight from the Heart); overall there was little opposition from the British government to passing the act. However, new research into documents of the Margaret Thatcher government indicate that Britain had serious concerns about the inclusion of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms within the Canada Act. Part of this concern stemmed from letters of protest the British received about it from provincial actors, but also because the Charter undermined the principle of parliamentary supremacy, which until that time had always been a core feature of every government practising the Westminster system.Through section 2 of the Canada Act 1982, the United Kingdom ended its involvement with further amendments to the Canadian constitution. Amendments to the Constitution now must be made under the various amending formulas set out in Part V of the Constitution Act, 1982.
| 0
|
[
"Canada Act 1982",
"language of work or name",
"French"
] |
The Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11; French: Loi de 1982 sur le Canada) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and one of the enactments which make up the Constitution of Canada. It was enacted at the request of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada to patriate Canada's constitution, ending the power of the British Parliament to amend the constitution. The act also formally ended the "request and consent" provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 in relation to Canada, whereby the British parliament had a general power to pass laws extending to Canada at its own request.
Annexed as Schedule B to the act is the text of the Constitution Act, 1982, in both of Canada's official languages (i.e. English and French). Because of the requirements of official bilingualism, the body of the Canada Act itself is also set out in French in Schedule A to the act, which is declared by s. 3 to have "the same authority in Canada as the English version thereof".
| 3
|
[
"Canada Act 1982",
"language of work or name",
"English"
] |
The Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11; French: Loi de 1982 sur le Canada) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and one of the enactments which make up the Constitution of Canada. It was enacted at the request of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada to patriate Canada's constitution, ending the power of the British Parliament to amend the constitution. The act also formally ended the "request and consent" provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 in relation to Canada, whereby the British parliament had a general power to pass laws extending to Canada at its own request.
Annexed as Schedule B to the act is the text of the Constitution Act, 1982, in both of Canada's official languages (i.e. English and French). Because of the requirements of official bilingualism, the body of the Canada Act itself is also set out in French in Schedule A to the act, which is declared by s. 3 to have "the same authority in Canada as the English version thereof".
| 4
|
[
"Canada Act 1982",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11; French: Loi de 1982 sur le Canada) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and one of the enactments which make up the Constitution of Canada. It was enacted at the request of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada to patriate Canada's constitution, ending the power of the British Parliament to amend the constitution. The act also formally ended the "request and consent" provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 in relation to Canada, whereby the British parliament had a general power to pass laws extending to Canada at its own request.
Annexed as Schedule B to the act is the text of the Constitution Act, 1982, in both of Canada's official languages (i.e. English and French). Because of the requirements of official bilingualism, the body of the Canada Act itself is also set out in French in Schedule A to the act, which is declared by s. 3 to have "the same authority in Canada as the English version thereof".Enactment
The Canada Act 1982 was passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in response to the request from the Canadian Senate and House of Commons to end Britain's authority and transfer the authority for amending the Constitution of Canada to the federal and provincial governments. After unpromising negotiations with the provincial governments, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau announced that the federal government would unilaterally patriate the Constitution from Britain. Manitoba, Newfoundland and Quebec responded by posing references to the provincial courts of appeal, challenging the federal government's power to seek unilateral amendments from Britain. In September 1981, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in the Patriation Reference that provincial consent was not legally necessary, but to do so without substantial consent would be contrary to a longstanding constitutional convention. Trudeau succeeded in convincing nine provinces out of ten to consent to patriation by agreeing to the addition of a Notwithstanding Clause to limit the application of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a result of discussions during a First Ministers' conference and other minor changes in November 1981.In the UK, 44 members of Parliament voted against the act, including 24 Conservative and 16 Labour MPs, citing concerns over Canada's past mistreatment of Quebec and Indigenous peoples (as recalled with frustration by Jean Chrétien in his memoirs Straight from the Heart); overall there was little opposition from the British government to passing the act. However, new research into documents of the Margaret Thatcher government indicate that Britain had serious concerns about the inclusion of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms within the Canada Act. Part of this concern stemmed from letters of protest the British received about it from provincial actors, but also because the Charter undermined the principle of parliamentary supremacy, which until that time had always been a core feature of every government practising the Westminster system.Through section 2 of the Canada Act 1982, the United Kingdom ended its involvement with further amendments to the Canadian constitution. Amendments to the Constitution now must be made under the various amending formulas set out in Part V of the Constitution Act, 1982.
| 5
|
[
"Canada Act 1982",
"instance of",
"founding document"
] |
The Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11; French: Loi de 1982 sur le Canada) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and one of the enactments which make up the Constitution of Canada. It was enacted at the request of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada to patriate Canada's constitution, ending the power of the British Parliament to amend the constitution. The act also formally ended the "request and consent" provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 in relation to Canada, whereby the British parliament had a general power to pass laws extending to Canada at its own request.
Annexed as Schedule B to the act is the text of the Constitution Act, 1982, in both of Canada's official languages (i.e. English and French). Because of the requirements of official bilingualism, the body of the Canada Act itself is also set out in French in Schedule A to the act, which is declared by s. 3 to have "the same authority in Canada as the English version thereof".
| 6
|
[
"Canada Act 1982",
"part of",
"Constitution of Canada"
] |
The Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11; French: Loi de 1982 sur le Canada) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and one of the enactments which make up the Constitution of Canada. It was enacted at the request of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada to patriate Canada's constitution, ending the power of the British Parliament to amend the constitution. The act also formally ended the "request and consent" provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 in relation to Canada, whereby the British parliament had a general power to pass laws extending to Canada at its own request.
Annexed as Schedule B to the act is the text of the Constitution Act, 1982, in both of Canada's official languages (i.e. English and French). Because of the requirements of official bilingualism, the body of the Canada Act itself is also set out in French in Schedule A to the act, which is declared by s. 3 to have "the same authority in Canada as the English version thereof".
| 8
|
[
"Canada Act 1982",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Canada Act 1982 (1982 c. 11; French: Loi de 1982 sur le Canada) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and one of the enactments which make up the Constitution of Canada. It was enacted at the request of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada to patriate Canada's constitution, ending the power of the British Parliament to amend the constitution. The act also formally ended the "request and consent" provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 in relation to Canada, whereby the British parliament had a general power to pass laws extending to Canada at its own request.
Annexed as Schedule B to the act is the text of the Constitution Act, 1982, in both of Canada's official languages (i.e. English and French). Because of the requirements of official bilingualism, the body of the Canada Act itself is also set out in French in Schedule A to the act, which is declared by s. 3 to have "the same authority in Canada as the English version thereof".Enactment
The Canada Act 1982 was passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in response to the request from the Canadian Senate and House of Commons to end Britain's authority and transfer the authority for amending the Constitution of Canada to the federal and provincial governments. After unpromising negotiations with the provincial governments, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau announced that the federal government would unilaterally patriate the Constitution from Britain. Manitoba, Newfoundland and Quebec responded by posing references to the provincial courts of appeal, challenging the federal government's power to seek unilateral amendments from Britain. In September 1981, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in the Patriation Reference that provincial consent was not legally necessary, but to do so without substantial consent would be contrary to a longstanding constitutional convention. Trudeau succeeded in convincing nine provinces out of ten to consent to patriation by agreeing to the addition of a Notwithstanding Clause to limit the application of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a result of discussions during a First Ministers' conference and other minor changes in November 1981.In the UK, 44 members of Parliament voted against the act, including 24 Conservative and 16 Labour MPs, citing concerns over Canada's past mistreatment of Quebec and Indigenous peoples (as recalled with frustration by Jean Chrétien in his memoirs Straight from the Heart); overall there was little opposition from the British government to passing the act. However, new research into documents of the Margaret Thatcher government indicate that Britain had serious concerns about the inclusion of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms within the Canada Act. Part of this concern stemmed from letters of protest the British received about it from provincial actors, but also because the Charter undermined the principle of parliamentary supremacy, which until that time had always been a core feature of every government practising the Westminster system.Through section 2 of the Canada Act 1982, the United Kingdom ended its involvement with further amendments to the Canadian constitution. Amendments to the Constitution now must be made under the various amending formulas set out in Part V of the Constitution Act, 1982.
| 9
|
[
"Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 63) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Its long title is "An Act to remove Doubts as to the Validity of Colonial Laws".
The purpose of the Act was to remove any apparent inconsistency between local (colonial) and British ("imperial") legislation. Thus it confirmed that colonial legislation (provided it had been passed in the proper manner) was to have full effect within the colony, limited only to the extent that it was not in contradiction with ("repugnant to") any Act of Parliament that contained powers which extended beyond the boundaries of the United Kingdom to include that colony. This had the effect of clarifying and strengthening the position of colonial legislatures, while at the same time restating their ultimate subordination to the Westminster Parliament.
Until the passage of the Act, a number of colonial statutes had been struck down by local judges on the grounds of repugnancy to English laws, whether or not those English laws had been intended by Parliament to be effective in the colony. This had been a particular problem for the government in South Australia, where Justice Benjamin Boothby had struck down local statutes on numerous occasions in the colony's Supreme Court.By the mid-1920s, the British government accepted that the dominions should have full legislative autonomy. Accordingly, the imperial Parliament passed the Statute of Westminster, which repealed the application of the Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 to the dominions (i.e., Australia, Canada, the Irish Free State, New Zealand, Newfoundland, and the Union of South Africa).
The Statute of Westminster took effect immediately in Canada, the Irish Free State and South Africa. Australia adopted the Statute in 1942 with the passing of the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942, with retroactive effect to 3 September 1939, the start of World War II. The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 continued to have application in individual Australian states until the Australia Act 1986 came into effect in 1986.
New Zealand adopted the Statute of Westminster in 1947.
Newfoundland never adopted the Statute of Westminster. Instead, facing grave financial difficulties as a result of the Great Depression, Newfoundland gave up responsible government in 1934. The Colonial Laws Validity Act continued to apply to Newfoundland, which was from then on ruled by an appointed Governor and Commission of Government until, in 1949, Newfoundland joined Canada as its tenth province.
Elsewhere, the Colonial Laws Validity Act remains in force, and helps to define the relationship between Acts of Parliament and laws passed in self-governing British territories, as well as the legality of decisions made by territorial legislatures and governments. The power to amend the Colonial Laws Validity Act rests with the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
| 0
|
[
"Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865",
"country",
"United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland"
] |
The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 63) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Its long title is "An Act to remove Doubts as to the Validity of Colonial Laws".
The purpose of the Act was to remove any apparent inconsistency between local (colonial) and British ("imperial") legislation. Thus it confirmed that colonial legislation (provided it had been passed in the proper manner) was to have full effect within the colony, limited only to the extent that it was not in contradiction with ("repugnant to") any Act of Parliament that contained powers which extended beyond the boundaries of the United Kingdom to include that colony. This had the effect of clarifying and strengthening the position of colonial legislatures, while at the same time restating their ultimate subordination to the Westminster Parliament.
Until the passage of the Act, a number of colonial statutes had been struck down by local judges on the grounds of repugnancy to English laws, whether or not those English laws had been intended by Parliament to be effective in the colony. This had been a particular problem for the government in South Australia, where Justice Benjamin Boothby had struck down local statutes on numerous occasions in the colony's Supreme Court.By the mid-1920s, the British government accepted that the dominions should have full legislative autonomy. Accordingly, the imperial Parliament passed the Statute of Westminster, which repealed the application of the Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 to the dominions (i.e., Australia, Canada, the Irish Free State, New Zealand, Newfoundland, and the Union of South Africa).
The Statute of Westminster took effect immediately in Canada, the Irish Free State and South Africa. Australia adopted the Statute in 1942 with the passing of the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942, with retroactive effect to 3 September 1939, the start of World War II. The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 continued to have application in individual Australian states until the Australia Act 1986 came into effect in 1986.
New Zealand adopted the Statute of Westminster in 1947.
Newfoundland never adopted the Statute of Westminster. Instead, facing grave financial difficulties as a result of the Great Depression, Newfoundland gave up responsible government in 1934. The Colonial Laws Validity Act continued to apply to Newfoundland, which was from then on ruled by an appointed Governor and Commission of Government until, in 1949, Newfoundland joined Canada as its tenth province.
Elsewhere, the Colonial Laws Validity Act remains in force, and helps to define the relationship between Acts of Parliament and laws passed in self-governing British territories, as well as the legality of decisions made by territorial legislatures and governments. The power to amend the Colonial Laws Validity Act rests with the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
| 1
|
[
"Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 63) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Its long title is "An Act to remove Doubts as to the Validity of Colonial Laws".
The purpose of the Act was to remove any apparent inconsistency between local (colonial) and British ("imperial") legislation. Thus it confirmed that colonial legislation (provided it had been passed in the proper manner) was to have full effect within the colony, limited only to the extent that it was not in contradiction with ("repugnant to") any Act of Parliament that contained powers which extended beyond the boundaries of the United Kingdom to include that colony. This had the effect of clarifying and strengthening the position of colonial legislatures, while at the same time restating their ultimate subordination to the Westminster Parliament.
Until the passage of the Act, a number of colonial statutes had been struck down by local judges on the grounds of repugnancy to English laws, whether or not those English laws had been intended by Parliament to be effective in the colony. This had been a particular problem for the government in South Australia, where Justice Benjamin Boothby had struck down local statutes on numerous occasions in the colony's Supreme Court.By the mid-1920s, the British government accepted that the dominions should have full legislative autonomy. Accordingly, the imperial Parliament passed the Statute of Westminster, which repealed the application of the Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 to the dominions (i.e., Australia, Canada, the Irish Free State, New Zealand, Newfoundland, and the Union of South Africa).
The Statute of Westminster took effect immediately in Canada, the Irish Free State and South Africa. Australia adopted the Statute in 1942 with the passing of the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942, with retroactive effect to 3 September 1939, the start of World War II. The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 continued to have application in individual Australian states until the Australia Act 1986 came into effect in 1986.
New Zealand adopted the Statute of Westminster in 1947.
Newfoundland never adopted the Statute of Westminster. Instead, facing grave financial difficulties as a result of the Great Depression, Newfoundland gave up responsible government in 1934. The Colonial Laws Validity Act continued to apply to Newfoundland, which was from then on ruled by an appointed Governor and Commission of Government until, in 1949, Newfoundland joined Canada as its tenth province.
Elsewhere, the Colonial Laws Validity Act remains in force, and helps to define the relationship between Acts of Parliament and laws passed in self-governing British territories, as well as the legality of decisions made by territorial legislatures and governments. The power to amend the Colonial Laws Validity Act rests with the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
| 4
|
[
"Slave Trade Act 1807",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Slave Trade Act 1807, officially An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom prohibiting the slave trade in the British Empire. Although it did not abolish the practice of slavery, it encouraged British action to press other nation states to abolish their own slave trades.
Many of the supporters thought the Act would lead to the end of slavery. Slavery on English soil was unsupported in English law and that position was confirmed in Somerset's case in 1772, but it remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833.
| 0
|
[
"Slave Trade Act 1807",
"country",
"United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland"
] |
The Slave Trade Act 1807, officially An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom prohibiting the slave trade in the British Empire. Although it did not abolish the practice of slavery, it encouraged British action to press other nation states to abolish their own slave trades.
Many of the supporters thought the Act would lead to the end of slavery. Slavery on English soil was unsupported in English law and that position was confirmed in Somerset's case in 1772, but it remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833.
| 2
|
[
"Slave Trade Act 1807",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland"
] |
The Slave Trade Act 1807, officially An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom prohibiting the slave trade in the British Empire. Although it did not abolish the practice of slavery, it encouraged British action to press other nation states to abolish their own slave trades.
Many of the supporters thought the Act would lead to the end of slavery. Slavery on English soil was unsupported in English law and that position was confirmed in Somerset's case in 1772, but it remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833.
| 3
|
[
"Slave Trade Act 1807",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Slave Trade Act 1807, officially An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom prohibiting the slave trade in the British Empire. Although it did not abolish the practice of slavery, it encouraged British action to press other nation states to abolish their own slave trades.
Many of the supporters thought the Act would lead to the end of slavery. Slavery on English soil was unsupported in English law and that position was confirmed in Somerset's case in 1772, but it remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833.
| 4
|
[
"Slave Trade Act 1807",
"main subject",
"slave trade"
] |
The Slave Trade Act 1807, officially An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom prohibiting the slave trade in the British Empire. Although it did not abolish the practice of slavery, it encouraged British action to press other nation states to abolish their own slave trades.
Many of the supporters thought the Act would lead to the end of slavery. Slavery on English soil was unsupported in English law and that position was confirmed in Somerset's case in 1772, but it remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833.
| 6
|
[
"Slave Trade Act 1807",
"topic's main category",
"Category:United Kingdom Acts of Parliament 1807"
] |
The Slave Trade Act 1807, officially An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom prohibiting the slave trade in the British Empire. Although it did not abolish the practice of slavery, it encouraged British action to press other nation states to abolish their own slave trades.
Many of the supporters thought the Act would lead to the end of slavery. Slavery on English soil was unsupported in English law and that position was confirmed in Somerset's case in 1772, but it remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833.
| 7
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"Canada"
] |
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (French: Charte canadienne des droits et libertés), often simply referred to as the Charter in Canada, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all governments in Canada. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was proclaimed in force by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, as part of the Constitution Act, 1982.
The Charter was preceded by the Canadian Bill of Rights, enacted in 1960, which was a federal statute rather than a constitutional document. As a federal statute, the Bill of Rights could be amended through the ordinary legislative process and had no application to provincial laws. The Supreme Court of Canada also narrowly interpreted the Bill of Rights, showing reluctance to declare laws inoperative. The relative ineffectiveness of the Canadian Bill of Rights motivated many to improve rights protections in Canada. The movement for human rights and freedoms that emerged after World War II also wanted to entrench the principles enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The British Parliament formally enacted the Charter as a part of the Canada Act 1982 at the request of the Parliament of Canada in 1982, the result of the efforts of the government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau.
The Charter greatly expanded the scope of judicial review, because the Charter is more explicit with respect to the guarantee of rights and the role of judges in enforcing them than was the Canadian Bill of Rights. Canadian courts, when confronted with violations of Charter rights, have struck down unconstitutional federal and provincial statutes and regulations or parts of statutes and regulations, as they did when Canadian case law was primarily concerned with resolving issues of federalism. The Charter, however, granted new powers to the courts to enforce remedies that are more creative and to exclude more evidence in trials. These powers are greater than what was typical under the common law and under a system of government that, influenced by Canada's parent country the United Kingdom, was based upon Parliamentary supremacy. As a result, the Charter has attracted both broad support from a majority of the electorate and criticisms by opponents of increased judicial power. The Charter applies only to government laws and actions (including the laws and actions of federal, provincial, and municipal governments and public school boards), and sometimes to the common law, not to private activity.
| 1
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Thirty of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Section 24
establishes how courts may enforce the Charter.
Section 25
states that the Charter does not derogate existing Aboriginal rights and freedoms. Aboriginal rights, including treaty rights, receive more direct constitutional protection under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
Section 26
clarifies that other rights and freedoms in Canada are not invalidated by the Charter.
Section 27
requires the Charter to be interpreted in a multicultural context.
Section 28
states all Charter rights are guaranteed equally to men and women.
Section 29
confirms the rights of separate schools are preserved.
Section 30
clarifies the applicability of the Charter in the territories.
Section 31
confirms that the Charter does not extend the powers of legislatures.
Section 34
states that Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, containing the first 34 sections of the Act, may be collectively referred to as the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms".
| 12
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Three of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Democratic rights
Generally, the right to participate in political activities and the right to a democratic form of government are protected:Section 3
the right to vote and to be eligible to serve as member of the House of Commons of Canada and provincial and territorial legislative assemblies.
Section 4
the maximum duration of the House of Commons and legislative assemblies is set at five years.
Section 5
an annual sitting of Parliament and legislatures is required.
| 17
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Four of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Democratic rights
Generally, the right to participate in political activities and the right to a democratic form of government are protected:Section 3
the right to vote and to be eligible to serve as member of the House of Commons of Canada and provincial and territorial legislative assemblies.
Section 4
the maximum duration of the House of Commons and legislative assemblies is set at five years.
Section 5
an annual sitting of Parliament and legislatures is required.
| 18
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Legal rights
Rights of people in dealing with the justice system and law enforcement are protected:Section 7
right to life, liberty, and security of the person.
Section 8
freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
Section 9
freedom from arbitrary detention or imprisonment.
Section 10
right to legal counsel and the guarantee of habeas corpus.
Section 11
rights in criminal and penal matters such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Section 12
right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment.
Section 13
rights against self-incrimination.
Section 14
right to an interpreter in a court proceeding.
| 21
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Eight of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Legal rights
Rights of people in dealing with the justice system and law enforcement are protected:Section 7
right to life, liberty, and security of the person.
Section 8
freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
Section 9
freedom from arbitrary detention or imprisonment.
Section 10
right to legal counsel and the guarantee of habeas corpus.
Section 11
rights in criminal and penal matters such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Section 12
right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment.
Section 13
rights against self-incrimination.
Section 14
right to an interpreter in a court proceeding.
| 22
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Nine of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Section 7
right to life, liberty, and security of the person.
Section 8
freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
Section 9
freedom from arbitrary detention or imprisonment.
Section 10
right to legal counsel and the guarantee of habeas corpus.
Section 11
rights in criminal and penal matters such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Section 12
right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment.
Section 13
rights against self-incrimination.
Section 14
right to an interpreter in a court proceeding.
| 23
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"instance of",
"founding document"
] |
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (French: Charte canadienne des droits et libertés), often simply referred to as the Charter in Canada, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all governments in Canada. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was proclaimed in force by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, as part of the Constitution Act, 1982.
The Charter was preceded by the Canadian Bill of Rights, enacted in 1960, which was a federal statute rather than a constitutional document. As a federal statute, the Bill of Rights could be amended through the ordinary legislative process and had no application to provincial laws. The Supreme Court of Canada also narrowly interpreted the Bill of Rights, showing reluctance to declare laws inoperative. The relative ineffectiveness of the Canadian Bill of Rights motivated many to improve rights protections in Canada. The movement for human rights and freedoms that emerged after World War II also wanted to entrench the principles enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The British Parliament formally enacted the Charter as a part of the Canada Act 1982 at the request of the Parliament of Canada in 1982, the result of the efforts of the government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau.
The Charter greatly expanded the scope of judicial review, because the Charter is more explicit with respect to the guarantee of rights and the role of judges in enforcing them than was the Canadian Bill of Rights. Canadian courts, when confronted with violations of Charter rights, have struck down unconstitutional federal and provincial statutes and regulations or parts of statutes and regulations, as they did when Canadian case law was primarily concerned with resolving issues of federalism. The Charter, however, granted new powers to the courts to enforce remedies that are more creative and to exclude more evidence in trials. These powers are greater than what was typical under the common law and under a system of government that, influenced by Canada's parent country the United Kingdom, was based upon Parliamentary supremacy. As a result, the Charter has attracted both broad support from a majority of the electorate and criticisms by opponents of increased judicial power. The Charter applies only to government laws and actions (including the laws and actions of federal, provincial, and municipal governments and public school boards), and sometimes to the common law, not to private activity.
| 29
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"part of",
"Constitution Act, 1982"
] |
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (French: Charte canadienne des droits et libertés), often simply referred to as the Charter in Canada, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all governments in Canada. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was proclaimed in force by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, as part of the Constitution Act, 1982.
The Charter was preceded by the Canadian Bill of Rights, enacted in 1960, which was a federal statute rather than a constitutional document. As a federal statute, the Bill of Rights could be amended through the ordinary legislative process and had no application to provincial laws. The Supreme Court of Canada also narrowly interpreted the Bill of Rights, showing reluctance to declare laws inoperative. The relative ineffectiveness of the Canadian Bill of Rights motivated many to improve rights protections in Canada. The movement for human rights and freedoms that emerged after World War II also wanted to entrench the principles enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The British Parliament formally enacted the Charter as a part of the Canada Act 1982 at the request of the Parliament of Canada in 1982, the result of the efforts of the government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau.
The Charter greatly expanded the scope of judicial review, because the Charter is more explicit with respect to the guarantee of rights and the role of judges in enforcing them than was the Canadian Bill of Rights. Canadian courts, when confronted with violations of Charter rights, have struck down unconstitutional federal and provincial statutes and regulations or parts of statutes and regulations, as they did when Canadian case law was primarily concerned with resolving issues of federalism. The Charter, however, granted new powers to the courts to enforce remedies that are more creative and to exclude more evidence in trials. These powers are greater than what was typical under the common law and under a system of government that, influenced by Canada's parent country the United Kingdom, was based upon Parliamentary supremacy. As a result, the Charter has attracted both broad support from a majority of the electorate and criticisms by opponents of increased judicial power. The Charter applies only to government laws and actions (including the laws and actions of federal, provincial, and municipal governments and public school boards), and sometimes to the common law, not to private activity.
| 30
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Seventeen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Section 16
English and French are the official languages of Canada and New Brunswick.
Section 16.1
the English and French-speaking communities of New Brunswick have equal rights to educational and cultural institutions.
Section 17
the right to use either official language in Parliament or the New Brunswick legislature.
Section 18
the statutes and proceedings of Parliament and the New Brunswick legislature are to be printed in both official languages.
Section 19
both official languages may be used in federal and New Brunswick courts.
Section 20
the right to communicate with and be served by the federal and New Brunswick governments in either official language.
Section 21
other constitutional language rights outside the Charter regarding English and French are sustained.
Section 22
existing rights to use languages besides English and French are not affected by the fact that only English and French have language rights in the Charter. (Hence, if there are any rights to use Aboriginal languages anywhere they would continue to exist, though they would have no direct protection under the Charter.)
| 32
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Eleven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Section 7
right to life, liberty, and security of the person.
Section 8
freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
Section 9
freedom from arbitrary detention or imprisonment.
Section 10
right to legal counsel and the guarantee of habeas corpus.
Section 11
rights in criminal and penal matters such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Section 12
right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment.
Section 13
rights against self-incrimination.
Section 14
right to an interpreter in a court proceeding.
| 34
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Following 1982
While the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was adopted in 1982, it was not until 1985 that the main provisions regarding equality rights (section 15) came into effect. The delay was meant to give the federal and provincial governments an opportunity to review pre-existing statutes and strike potentially unconstitutional inequalities.
| 37
|
[
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms",
"has part(s)",
"Section Eighteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
] |
Section 16
English and French are the official languages of Canada and New Brunswick.
Section 16.1
the English and French-speaking communities of New Brunswick have equal rights to educational and cultural institutions.
Section 17
the right to use either official language in Parliament or the New Brunswick legislature.
Section 18
the statutes and proceedings of Parliament and the New Brunswick legislature are to be printed in both official languages.
Section 19
both official languages may be used in federal and New Brunswick courts.
Section 20
the right to communicate with and be served by the federal and New Brunswick governments in either official language.
Section 21
other constitutional language rights outside the Charter regarding English and French are sustained.
Section 22
existing rights to use languages besides English and French are not affected by the fact that only English and French have language rights in the Charter. (Hence, if there are any rights to use Aboriginal languages anywhere they would continue to exist, though they would have no direct protection under the Charter.)
| 40
|
[
"Bribery Act 2010",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Bribery Act 2010 (c.23) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that covers the criminal law relating to bribery. Introduced to Parliament in the Queen's Speech in 2009 after several decades of reports and draft bills, the Act received the Royal Assent on 8 April 2010 following cross-party support. Initially scheduled to enter into force in April 2010, this was changed to 1 July 2011. The Act repeals all previous statutory and common law provisions in relation to bribery, instead replacing them with the crimes of bribery, being bribed, the bribery of foreign public officials, and the failure of a commercial organisation to prevent bribery on its behalf.
The penalties for committing a crime under the Act are a maximum of 10 years' imprisonment, along with an unlimited fine, and the potential for the confiscation of property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, as well as the disqualification of directors under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986. The Act has a near-universal jurisdiction, allowing for the prosecution of an individual or company with links to the United Kingdom, regardless of where the crime occurred. It has been described as "the toughest anti-corruption legislation in the world".
| 1
|
[
"Bribery Act 2010",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Bribery Act 2010 (c.23) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that covers the criminal law relating to bribery. Introduced to Parliament in the Queen's Speech in 2009 after several decades of reports and draft bills, the Act received the Royal Assent on 8 April 2010 following cross-party support. Initially scheduled to enter into force in April 2010, this was changed to 1 July 2011. The Act repeals all previous statutory and common law provisions in relation to bribery, instead replacing them with the crimes of bribery, being bribed, the bribery of foreign public officials, and the failure of a commercial organisation to prevent bribery on its behalf.
The penalties for committing a crime under the Act are a maximum of 10 years' imprisonment, along with an unlimited fine, and the potential for the confiscation of property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, as well as the disqualification of directors under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986. The Act has a near-universal jurisdiction, allowing for the prosecution of an individual or company with links to the United Kingdom, regardless of where the crime occurred. It has been described as "the toughest anti-corruption legislation in the world".
| 3
|
[
"Bribery Act 2010",
"main subject",
"bribery"
] |
The Bribery Act 2010 (c.23) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that covers the criminal law relating to bribery. Introduced to Parliament in the Queen's Speech in 2009 after several decades of reports and draft bills, the Act received the Royal Assent on 8 April 2010 following cross-party support. Initially scheduled to enter into force in April 2010, this was changed to 1 July 2011. The Act repeals all previous statutory and common law provisions in relation to bribery, instead replacing them with the crimes of bribery, being bribed, the bribery of foreign public officials, and the failure of a commercial organisation to prevent bribery on its behalf.
The penalties for committing a crime under the Act are a maximum of 10 years' imprisonment, along with an unlimited fine, and the potential for the confiscation of property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, as well as the disqualification of directors under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986. The Act has a near-universal jurisdiction, allowing for the prosecution of an individual or company with links to the United Kingdom, regardless of where the crime occurred. It has been described as "the toughest anti-corruption legislation in the world".
| 4
|
[
"Bribery Act 2010",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Bribery Act 2010 (c.23) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that covers the criminal law relating to bribery. Introduced to Parliament in the Queen's Speech in 2009 after several decades of reports and draft bills, the Act received the Royal Assent on 8 April 2010 following cross-party support. Initially scheduled to enter into force in April 2010, this was changed to 1 July 2011. The Act repeals all previous statutory and common law provisions in relation to bribery, instead replacing them with the crimes of bribery, being bribed, the bribery of foreign public officials, and the failure of a commercial organisation to prevent bribery on its behalf.
The penalties for committing a crime under the Act are a maximum of 10 years' imprisonment, along with an unlimited fine, and the potential for the confiscation of property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, as well as the disqualification of directors under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986. The Act has a near-universal jurisdiction, allowing for the prosecution of an individual or company with links to the United Kingdom, regardless of where the crime occurred. It has been described as "the toughest anti-corruption legislation in the world".
| 5
|
[
"Transport Act 1947",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Transport Act 1947 (10 & 11 Geo. 6 c. 49) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Under the terms of the Act, the railway network, long-distance road haulage and various other types of transport were nationalised and came under the administration of the British Transport Commission. The BTC was responsible to the Ministry of Transport for general transport policy, which it exercised principally through financial control of a number of executives set up to manage specified sections of the industry under schemes of delegation.
| 0
|
[
"Transport Act 1947",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Transport Act 1947 (10 & 11 Geo. 6 c. 49) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Under the terms of the Act, the railway network, long-distance road haulage and various other types of transport were nationalised and came under the administration of the British Transport Commission. The BTC was responsible to the Ministry of Transport for general transport policy, which it exercised principally through financial control of a number of executives set up to manage specified sections of the industry under schemes of delegation.
| 1
|
[
"Transport Act 1947",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Transport Act 1947 (10 & 11 Geo. 6 c. 49) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Under the terms of the Act, the railway network, long-distance road haulage and various other types of transport were nationalised and came under the administration of the British Transport Commission. The BTC was responsible to the Ministry of Transport for general transport policy, which it exercised principally through financial control of a number of executives set up to manage specified sections of the industry under schemes of delegation.
| 2
|
[
"Transport Act 1947",
"main subject",
"British Transport Commission"
] |
The Transport Act 1947 (10 & 11 Geo. 6 c. 49) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Under the terms of the Act, the railway network, long-distance road haulage and various other types of transport were nationalised and came under the administration of the British Transport Commission. The BTC was responsible to the Ministry of Transport for general transport policy, which it exercised principally through financial control of a number of executives set up to manage specified sections of the industry under schemes of delegation.
| 4
|
[
"Transport Act 1947",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Transport Act 1947 (10 & 11 Geo. 6 c. 49) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Under the terms of the Act, the railway network, long-distance road haulage and various other types of transport were nationalised and came under the administration of the British Transport Commission. The BTC was responsible to the Ministry of Transport for general transport policy, which it exercised principally through financial control of a number of executives set up to manage specified sections of the industry under schemes of delegation.
| 5
|
[
"Quartering Acts",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Quartering Acts were two or more Acts of British Parliament requiring local governments of Britain's North American colonies to provide the British soldiers with housing and food. Each of the Quartering Acts was an amendment to the Mutiny Act and required annual renewal by Parliament. They were originally intended as a response to issues that arose during the French and Indian War and soon became a source of tensions between the inhabitants of the Thirteen Colonies and the government in London. These tensions would later lead toward the American Revolution.
| 0
|
[
"Quartering Acts",
"instance of",
"Act of the Parliament of Great Britain"
] |
The Quartering Acts were two or more Acts of British Parliament requiring local governments of Britain's North American colonies to provide the British soldiers with housing and food. Each of the Quartering Acts was an amendment to the Mutiny Act and required annual renewal by Parliament. They were originally intended as a response to issues that arose during the French and Indian War and soon became a source of tensions between the inhabitants of the Thirteen Colonies and the government in London. These tensions would later lead toward the American Revolution.
| 2
|
[
"Quartering Acts",
"country",
"Great Britain"
] |
The Quartering Acts were two or more Acts of British Parliament requiring local governments of Britain's North American colonies to provide the British soldiers with housing and food. Each of the Quartering Acts was an amendment to the Mutiny Act and required annual renewal by Parliament. They were originally intended as a response to issues that arose during the French and Indian War and soon became a source of tensions between the inhabitants of the Thirteen Colonies and the government in London. These tensions would later lead toward the American Revolution.
| 3
|
[
"Quartering Acts",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"Thirteen Colonies"
] |
The Quartering Acts were two or more Acts of British Parliament requiring local governments of Britain's North American colonies to provide the British soldiers with housing and food. Each of the Quartering Acts was an amendment to the Mutiny Act and required annual renewal by Parliament. They were originally intended as a response to issues that arose during the French and Indian War and soon became a source of tensions between the inhabitants of the Thirteen Colonies and the government in London. These tensions would later lead toward the American Revolution.Quartering Act 1774
The Quartering Act 1774 was known as one of the Coercive Acts in Great Britain, and as part of the intolerable acts in the colonies. The Quartering Act applied to all of the colonies, and sought to create a more effective method of housing British troops in America. In a previous act, the colonies had been required to provide housing for soldiers, but colonial legislatures had been uncooperative in doing so. The new Quartering Act allowed a governor to house soldiers in other buildings if suitable quarters were not provided. While many sources claim that the Quartering Act allowed troops to be billeted in occupied private homes, historian David Ammerman's 1974 study claimed that this is a myth, and that the act only permitted troops to be quartered in unoccupied buildings.
...it shall and may be lawful for the governor of the province to order and direct such and so many uninhabited houses, out-houses, barns, or other buildings, as he shall think necessary to be taken...
The act expired on 24 March 1776.
| 4
|
[
"Corn Laws",
"instance of",
"series of Acts of Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
Opposition
In 1820, the Merchants' Petition, written by Thomas Tooke, was presented to the House of Commons. The petition demanded free trade and an end to protective tariffs. The Prime Minister, Lord Liverpool, who claimed to be in favour of free trade, blocked the petition. He argued, speciously, that complicated restrictions made it difficult to repeal protectionist laws. He added, though, that he believed Britain's economic dominance grew in spite of, not because of, the protectionist system. In 1821, the President of the Board of Trade, William Huskisson, composed a Commons committee report which recommended a return to the "practically free" trade of the pre-1815 years.
The Importation Act 1822 decreed that corn could be imported when the price of domestically harvested corn rose to 80/- (£4) per quarter but that the import of corn would again be prohibited when the price fell to 70/- per quarter. After this Act was passed, the corn price never rose to 80/- until 1828. In 1827, the landlords rejected Huskisson's proposals for a sliding scale, and during the next year Huskisson and the new Prime Minister, the Duke of Wellington, devised a new sliding scale for the Importation of Corn Act 1828 whereby, when domestic corn was 52/- (£2/12/0) per quarter or less, the duty would be 34/8 (£1/14/8), and when the price increased to 73/- (£3/13/0), the duty decreased to one shilling.
| 1
|
[
"Crofters Holdings (Scotland) Act 1886",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
Primary Legislation since 1886
There has been a steady flow of primary legislation on crofting, including:Crofters Holdings (Scotland) Act 1886
Crofters Holding (Scotland) Act 1887
Crofters Commission (Delegation of Powers) Act 1888
Crofters Common Grazings Regulation Act, 1891
Small Landholders (Scotland) Act 1911
Crofters (Scotland) Act 1955
Crofters (Scotland) Act 1961
Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act 1976
Crofters (Scotland) Act 1993
Transfer of Crofting Estates (Scotland) Act 1997
Crofting Reform etc. Act 2007
Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act 2010
Crofting (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2013This is summarised in David Findlay's Blog for the Law Society of Scotland.
| 3
|
[
"Crofters Holdings (Scotland) Act 1886",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
Primary Legislation since 1886
There has been a steady flow of primary legislation on crofting, including:Crofters Holdings (Scotland) Act 1886
Crofters Holding (Scotland) Act 1887
Crofters Commission (Delegation of Powers) Act 1888
Crofters Common Grazings Regulation Act, 1891
Small Landholders (Scotland) Act 1911
Crofters (Scotland) Act 1955
Crofters (Scotland) Act 1961
Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act 1976
Crofters (Scotland) Act 1993
Transfer of Crofting Estates (Scotland) Act 1997
Crofting Reform etc. Act 2007
Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act 2010
Crofting (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2013This is summarised in David Findlay's Blog for the Law Society of Scotland.
| 4
|
[
"HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006 is a local Act of Parliament, passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in June 2006. The aim of the act was to provide HBOS plc, a banking and insurance group in the UK, the legal authority to reorganise its subsidiaries into a simplified structure. It came into effect on 17 September 2007.
| 0
|
[
"HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006 is a local Act of Parliament, passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in June 2006. The aim of the act was to provide HBOS plc, a banking and insurance group in the UK, the legal authority to reorganise its subsidiaries into a simplified structure. It came into effect on 17 September 2007.
| 1
|
[
"HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006",
"instance of",
"Local Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006 is a local Act of Parliament, passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in June 2006. The aim of the act was to provide HBOS plc, a banking and insurance group in the UK, the legal authority to reorganise its subsidiaries into a simplified structure. It came into effect on 17 September 2007.
| 3
|
[
"HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006 is a local Act of Parliament, passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in June 2006. The aim of the act was to provide HBOS plc, a banking and insurance group in the UK, the legal authority to reorganise its subsidiaries into a simplified structure. It came into effect on 17 September 2007.
| 5
|
[
"HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006",
"main subject",
"HBOS plc"
] |
The HBOS Group Reorganisation Act 2006 is a local Act of Parliament, passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in June 2006. The aim of the act was to provide HBOS plc, a banking and insurance group in the UK, the legal authority to reorganise its subsidiaries into a simplified structure. It came into effect on 17 September 2007.Aims of the Act
The main aim of the Act is to simplify HBOS's operating structure, namely:changing the legal status of the Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland to a public limited company (Bank of Scotland plc);
transferring the assets and liabilities of HBOS's UK banking subsidiaries (Halifax plc, Capital Bank plc, and HBOS Treasury Services plc) to the new company ;
transferring the remaining assets of the Clerical, Medical and General Life Assurance Society to HBOS's subsidiary, Clerical Medical Investment Group Limited and dissolve the society. The bulk of the Society's assets were acquired by Halifax plc in 1997, although some residual assets were not transferred at that time.Bank of Scotland plc
The Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland was unusual in its legal structure, as it was a company formed under statute, the 1695 Act, and was governed under the provisions of that Act and successive Acts of Parliament relating to the bank. The most important was the Bank of Scotland Act 1920, which set out the bank's business objectives and its regulations.
HBOS Group wished to restructure the bank into a public limited company (plc) governed under the Companies Act 1985, and transfer the assets and liabilities of its other UK subsidiaries with a banking licence (Capital Bank, Halifax plc and HBOS Treasury Service plc) to the new Bank of Scotland plc. By doing it could save the costs of maintaining four banking licences, and the need for four separate companies, each with their own board of directors.
The transfer of assets and liabilities from one bank to another also requires the consent of the account holders. For institutions such as the Halifax, this would involve seeking the consent of millions of people, and would be impractical. Thus an Act of Parliament gives HBOS the statutory authority to transfer accounts without seeking individual account holder approval.
The Act also allowed the company to retain the right to print banknotes.
| 6
|
[
"Data Protection Act 1998",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA, c. 29) was an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom designed to protect personal data stored on computers or in an organised paper filing system. It enacted provisions from the European Union (EU) Data Protection Directive 1995 on the protection, processing, and movement of data.
Under the 1998 DPA, individuals had legal rights to control information about themselves. Most of the Act did not apply to domestic use, such as keeping a personal address book. Anyone holding personal data for other purposes was legally obliged to comply with this Act, subject to some exemptions. The Act defined eight data protection principles to ensure that information was processed lawfully.
It was superseded by the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018) on 23 May 2018. The DPA 2018 supplements the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into effect on 25 May 2018. The GDPR regulates the collection, storage, and use of personal data significantly more strictly.
| 0
|
[
"Data Protection Act 1998",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA, c. 29) was an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom designed to protect personal data stored on computers or in an organised paper filing system. It enacted provisions from the European Union (EU) Data Protection Directive 1995 on the protection, processing, and movement of data.
Under the 1998 DPA, individuals had legal rights to control information about themselves. Most of the Act did not apply to domestic use, such as keeping a personal address book. Anyone holding personal data for other purposes was legally obliged to comply with this Act, subject to some exemptions. The Act defined eight data protection principles to ensure that information was processed lawfully.
It was superseded by the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018) on 23 May 2018. The DPA 2018 supplements the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into effect on 25 May 2018. The GDPR regulates the collection, storage, and use of personal data significantly more strictly.
| 1
|
[
"Data Protection Act 1998",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA, c. 29) was an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom designed to protect personal data stored on computers or in an organised paper filing system. It enacted provisions from the European Union (EU) Data Protection Directive 1995 on the protection, processing, and movement of data.
Under the 1998 DPA, individuals had legal rights to control information about themselves. Most of the Act did not apply to domestic use, such as keeping a personal address book. Anyone holding personal data for other purposes was legally obliged to comply with this Act, subject to some exemptions. The Act defined eight data protection principles to ensure that information was processed lawfully.
It was superseded by the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018) on 23 May 2018. The DPA 2018 supplements the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into effect on 25 May 2018. The GDPR regulates the collection, storage, and use of personal data significantly more strictly.
| 2
|
[
"Data Protection Act 1998",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA, c. 29) was an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom designed to protect personal data stored on computers or in an organised paper filing system. It enacted provisions from the European Union (EU) Data Protection Directive 1995 on the protection, processing, and movement of data.
Under the 1998 DPA, individuals had legal rights to control information about themselves. Most of the Act did not apply to domestic use, such as keeping a personal address book. Anyone holding personal data for other purposes was legally obliged to comply with this Act, subject to some exemptions. The Act defined eight data protection principles to ensure that information was processed lawfully.
It was superseded by the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018) on 23 May 2018. The DPA 2018 supplements the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into effect on 25 May 2018. The GDPR regulates the collection, storage, and use of personal data significantly more strictly.
| 5
|
[
"Reform Act 1867",
"instance of",
"election act"
] |
The Representation of the People Act 1867, 30 & 31 Vict., c. 102 (known as the Reform Act 1867 or the Second Reform Act) is an Act of the British Parliament that enfranchised part of the urban male working class in England and Wales for the first time. It took effect in stages over the next two years, culminating in full commencement on 1 January 1869.Before the Act, only one million of the seven million adult men in England and Wales could vote; the Act immediately doubled that number. Further, by the end of 1868 all male heads of household could vote, having abolished the widespread mechanism of the deemed rentpayer or ratepayer being a superior lessor or landlord who would act as middleman for those monies paid ("compounding"). The Act introduced a near-negligible redistribution of seats, far short of the urbanisation and population growth since 1832.
The overall intent was to help the Conservative Party, Benjamin Disraeli expecting a reward for his sudden and sweeping backing of the reforms discussed, yet it resulted in their loss of the 1868 general election.Background
For the decades after the Great Reform Act of 1832 (the First Reform Act), cabinets (in that era leading from both Houses) had resisted attempts to push through further reform, and in particular left unfulfilled the six demands of the Chartist movement. After 1848, this movement declined rapidly, but elite opinion began to pay attention. It was thus only 27 years after the initial, quite modest, Great Reform Act that leading politicians thought it prudent to introduce further electoral reform. Following an unsuccessful attempt by Benjamin Disraeli to introduce a reform bill in 1859, Lord John Russell, who had played a major role in passing the 1832 Reform Act, attempted this in 1860; but the Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston, a fellow Liberal, was against any further electoral reform.The Union victory in the American Civil War in 1865 emboldened the forces in Britain that demanded more democracy and public input into the political system, to the dismay of the upper class landed gentry who identified with the US Southern States planters and feared the loss of influence and a popular radical movement. Influential commentators included Walter Bagehot, Thomas Carlyle, Anthony Trollope, Karl Marx and John Stuart Mill. Proponents used two arguments: the balance of the constitution and "moral right". They emphasized that deserving, skilled, sober, thrifty, and deferential artisans deserve the franchise. Liberal William Gladstone emphasized the "moral" improvement of workingmen and felt that they should therefore have the opportunity of "demonstrating their allegiance to their betters". However the opposition warned against the low-class democracy of the United States and Australia.Palmerston's death in 1865 opened the floodgates for reform. In 1866 Russell (Earl Russell as he had been since 1861, and now Prime Minister for the second time), introduced a Reform Bill. It was a cautious bill, which proposed to enfranchise "respectable" working men, excluding unskilled workers and what was known as the "residuum", those seen by MPs as the "feckless and criminal" poor. This was ensured by a £7 annual rent qualification to vote—or 2 shillings and 9 pence (2s 9d) a week. This entailed two "fancy franchises", emulating measures of 1854, a £10 lodger qualification for the boroughs, and a £50 savings qualification in the counties. Liberals claimed that "the middle classes, strengthened by the best of the artisans, would still have the preponderance of power".When it came to the vote, however, this bill split the Liberal Party: a split partly engineered by Benjamin Disraeli, who incited those threatened by the bill to rise up against it. On one side were the reactionary conservative Liberals, known as the Adullamites; on the other were pro-reform Liberals who supported the Government. The Adullamites were supported by Tories and the liberal Whigs were supported by radicals and reformists.The bill was thus defeated and the Liberal government of Russell resigned.Effects
Direct effects of the Act
The slur of local bribery and corruption dogged early debates in 1867–68. The whips' and leaders' decision to steer away discussion of electoral malpractice or irregularity to 1868's Election Petitions Act facilitated the progress of the main Reform Act.The unprecedented extension of the franchise to all householders effectively gave the vote to many working-class men, quite a considerable change. Jonathan Parry described this as a "borough franchise revolution"; Overwhelming election of the landed class or otherwise very wealthy to the Commons would no longer be assured by money, bribery and favours, those elected would reflect the most common sentiment of local units of the public. The brand-new franchise provisions were briefly flawed; the act did not address the issues of compounding and of not being a ratepayer in a household. Compounding (counting of one's under-tenants payments and using that count as a qualification) as to all rates and rents was made illegal, abolished in the enactment of a bill tabled by Liberal Grosvenor Hodgkinson. This meant that all male tenants would have to pay the parish/local rates directly and thus thereafter qualified for the vote.
A flaw remained. The preparation of the local electoral registers (there has been no national register) was still left too easily manipulated by party organisers who could remove opponents and add supporters at will. Each local register was difficult to contest.
A 2022 study found that the Act reduced political violence in the UK.
| 4
|
[
"Peerage Act 1963",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Peerage Act 1963 (c. 48) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that permits women peeresses and all Scottish hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords and allows newly inherited hereditary peerages to be disclaimed.Background
The Act resulted largely from the protests of Labour politician Tony Benn, then the 2nd Viscount Stansgate. Under British law at the time, peers of England, peers of Great Britain and peers of the United Kingdom (who met certain qualifications, such as age which was (and is) 21) were automatically members of the House of Lords and could not sit in or vote in elections for the other chamber, the House of Commons.
At the time of the Act, thirty peers in the Peerage of Scotland also had English, British or UK peerages and were thus members of the House of Lords.
When William Wedgwood Benn, Tony Benn's father, agreed to accept the Viscountcy, he ascertained that the heir-apparent, his eldest son Michael, did not plan to enter the House of Commons. However, within a few years of the peerage being accepted, Michael Benn was killed in action in the Second World War. Tony Benn, his younger brother, became heir apparent to the peerage and was elected to the House of Commons in 1950. Not wishing to leave it for the other House, he campaigned through the 1950s for a change in the law. In 1960, the 1st Viscount died and Tony Benn inherited the title, automatically losing his seat in the House of Commons as a member for the constituency of Bristol South East. In the ensuing by-election, however, Benn was re-elected to the Commons, despite being disqualified. An election court ruled that he could not take his seat, instead awarding it to the runner-up, the Conservative Malcolm St Clair.In 1963, the Conservative Government agreed to introduce a Peerage Bill, allowing individuals to disclaim peerages; it received royal assent on 31 July 1963. Tony Benn was the first peer to make use of the Act. St Clair, fulfilling a promise he had made at the time of taking his seat, accepted the office of Steward of the Manor of Northstead the previous day, thereby disqualifying himself from the House (outright resignation is prohibited), and Benn was then re-elected in Bristol South East at the ensuing by-election.
| 0
|
[
"Peerage Act 1963",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Peerage Act 1963 (c. 48) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that permits women peeresses and all Scottish hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords and allows newly inherited hereditary peerages to be disclaimed.Background
The Act resulted largely from the protests of Labour politician Tony Benn, then the 2nd Viscount Stansgate. Under British law at the time, peers of England, peers of Great Britain and peers of the United Kingdom (who met certain qualifications, such as age which was (and is) 21) were automatically members of the House of Lords and could not sit in or vote in elections for the other chamber, the House of Commons.
At the time of the Act, thirty peers in the Peerage of Scotland also had English, British or UK peerages and were thus members of the House of Lords.
When William Wedgwood Benn, Tony Benn's father, agreed to accept the Viscountcy, he ascertained that the heir-apparent, his eldest son Michael, did not plan to enter the House of Commons. However, within a few years of the peerage being accepted, Michael Benn was killed in action in the Second World War. Tony Benn, his younger brother, became heir apparent to the peerage and was elected to the House of Commons in 1950. Not wishing to leave it for the other House, he campaigned through the 1950s for a change in the law. In 1960, the 1st Viscount died and Tony Benn inherited the title, automatically losing his seat in the House of Commons as a member for the constituency of Bristol South East. In the ensuing by-election, however, Benn was re-elected to the Commons, despite being disqualified. An election court ruled that he could not take his seat, instead awarding it to the runner-up, the Conservative Malcolm St Clair.In 1963, the Conservative Government agreed to introduce a Peerage Bill, allowing individuals to disclaim peerages; it received royal assent on 31 July 1963. Tony Benn was the first peer to make use of the Act. St Clair, fulfilling a promise he had made at the time of taking his seat, accepted the office of Steward of the Manor of Northstead the previous day, thereby disqualifying himself from the House (outright resignation is prohibited), and Benn was then re-elected in Bristol South East at the ensuing by-election.
| 1
|
[
"Peerage Act 1963",
"language of work or name",
"English"
] |
The Peerage Act 1963 (c. 48) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that permits women peeresses and all Scottish hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords and allows newly inherited hereditary peerages to be disclaimed.
| 2
|
[
"Peerage Act 1963",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Peerage Act 1963 (c. 48) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that permits women peeresses and all Scottish hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords and allows newly inherited hereditary peerages to be disclaimed.
| 3
|
[
"Peerage Act 1963",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Peerage Act 1963 (c. 48) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that permits women peeresses and all Scottish hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords and allows newly inherited hereditary peerages to be disclaimed.
| 4
|
[
"Government of India Act 1858",
"country",
"United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland"
] |
The Government of India Act 1858 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom (21 & 22 Vict. c. 106) passed on 2 August 1858. Its provisions called for the liquidation of the British East India Company (who had up to this point been ruling British India under the auspices of Parliament) and the transference of its functions to the British Crown. Lord Palmerston, then-Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, introduced a bill for the transfer of control of the Government of India from the East India Company to the Crown, referring to the grave defects in the existing system of the government of India. However, before this bill was to be passed, Palmerston was forced to resign on another issue.
Later Edward Stanley, 15th Earl of Derby (who would later become the first Secretary of State for India), introduced another bill which was originally titled as "An Act for the Better Governance of India" and it was passed on 2 August 1858. This act provided that India was to be governed directly and in the name of the Crown.
| 1
|
[
"Government of India Act 1858",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland"
] |
The Government of India Act 1858 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom (21 & 22 Vict. c. 106) passed on 2 August 1858. Its provisions called for the liquidation of the British East India Company (who had up to this point been ruling British India under the auspices of Parliament) and the transference of its functions to the British Crown. Lord Palmerston, then-Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, introduced a bill for the transfer of control of the Government of India from the East India Company to the Crown, referring to the grave defects in the existing system of the government of India. However, before this bill was to be passed, Palmerston was forced to resign on another issue.
Later Edward Stanley, 15th Earl of Derby (who would later become the first Secretary of State for India), introduced another bill which was originally titled as "An Act for the Better Governance of India" and it was passed on 2 August 1858. This act provided that India was to be governed directly and in the name of the Crown.
| 2
|
[
"Government of India Act 1858",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Government of India Act 1858 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom (21 & 22 Vict. c. 106) passed on 2 August 1858. Its provisions called for the liquidation of the British East India Company (who had up to this point been ruling British India under the auspices of Parliament) and the transference of its functions to the British Crown. Lord Palmerston, then-Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, introduced a bill for the transfer of control of the Government of India from the East India Company to the Crown, referring to the grave defects in the existing system of the government of India. However, before this bill was to be passed, Palmerston was forced to resign on another issue.
Later Edward Stanley, 15th Earl of Derby (who would later become the first Secretary of State for India), introduced another bill which was originally titled as "An Act for the Better Governance of India" and it was passed on 2 August 1858. This act provided that India was to be governed directly and in the name of the Crown.
| 3
|
[
"Government of India Act 1858",
"part of the series",
"21 & 22 Vic"
] |
The Government of India Act 1858 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom (21 & 22 Vict. c. 106) passed on 2 August 1858. Its provisions called for the liquidation of the British East India Company (who had up to this point been ruling British India under the auspices of Parliament) and the transference of its functions to the British Crown. Lord Palmerston, then-Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, introduced a bill for the transfer of control of the Government of India from the East India Company to the Crown, referring to the grave defects in the existing system of the government of India. However, before this bill was to be passed, Palmerston was forced to resign on another issue.
Later Edward Stanley, 15th Earl of Derby (who would later become the first Secretary of State for India), introduced another bill which was originally titled as "An Act for the Better Governance of India" and it was passed on 2 August 1858. This act provided that India was to be governed directly and in the name of the Crown.
| 4
|
[
"Light Railways Act 1896",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Light Railways Act 1896 (59 & 60 Vict. c.48) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.History
Before the Act each new railway line built in the country required a specific Act of Parliament to be obtained by the company that wished to construct it, which greatly added to the cost and time it took to construct new railways. The economic downturn of the 1880s had hit agriculture and rural communities in the United Kingdom especially hard and the government wished to facilitate the construction of railways in rural areas, especially to facilitate the transport of goods. The 1896 Act defined a class of railways which did not require specific legislation to construct – companies could simply plan a line under the auspices of the new Act, and, having obtained a light railway order, build and operate it. By reducing the legal costs and allowing new railways to be built quickly the government hoped to encourage companies to build the new 'light railways' in areas of low population and industry that were previously of little interest to them.
A light railway is not a tramway but a separate class of railway. The Act was triggered by the complexity of creating the low-cost railways that were needed at the time in rural areas, and by the successful use of tramway rules to create the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway in 1882, which was in fact a light railway in all but name.
The Regulation of Railways Act 1868 had permitted the construction of light railways subject to '...such conditions and regulations as the Board of Trade may from time to time impose or make'; for such railways it specified a maximum permitted axle weight and stated that '...the regulations respecting the speed of trains shall not authorize a speed exceeding at any time twenty-five miles an hour'. The Light Railways Act 1896 did not specify any exceptions or limitations that should apply to light railways; it did not even attempt to define a 'light railway'. However, it gave powers to the Light Railway Commissioners to include 'provisions for the safety of the public... as they think necessary for the proper construction and working of the railway' in any light railway order (LRO) granted under the Act. These could limit vehicle axle weights and speeds: the maximum speed of 25 miles per hour (mph) often associated with the Light Railways Act 1896 is not specified in the Act but was a product of the earlier 1868 Act. However, limits were particularly needed when lightly laid track and relatively modest bridges were used in order to keep costs down. LROs could also exempt light railways from some of the requirements of a normal railway: level crossings did not have to be protected by gates, but only by cattle grids, saving the cost of both the gates and a keeper to operate them. It did not exclude standard-gauge track, but narrow gauge tracks were used for many railways built under its provisions. Many of the railways built under the auspices of the Act were very basic, with little or no signalling (many ran under the 'one engine in steam' principle).
A number of municipal and company-owned street tramways were built or extended by the Act, in preference to the Tramways Act 1870. The procedure of the 1896 Act was simpler, permission easier to obtain (local authorities had the right to veto lines under the 1870 legislation), and there was a 75% savings on rates payable as compared to a tramway.
The Light Railways Act was never a great success. By the 1920s the use of road transport had killed the majority of these little railways, although some survived thanks to clever management and tight financial control.
Until the Transport and Works Act 1992 introduced transport works orders, heritage railways in the UK were operated under light railway orders.
| 0
|
[
"Light Railways Act 1896",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Light Railways Act 1896 (59 & 60 Vict. c.48) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.History
Before the Act each new railway line built in the country required a specific Act of Parliament to be obtained by the company that wished to construct it, which greatly added to the cost and time it took to construct new railways. The economic downturn of the 1880s had hit agriculture and rural communities in the United Kingdom especially hard and the government wished to facilitate the construction of railways in rural areas, especially to facilitate the transport of goods. The 1896 Act defined a class of railways which did not require specific legislation to construct – companies could simply plan a line under the auspices of the new Act, and, having obtained a light railway order, build and operate it. By reducing the legal costs and allowing new railways to be built quickly the government hoped to encourage companies to build the new 'light railways' in areas of low population and industry that were previously of little interest to them.
A light railway is not a tramway but a separate class of railway. The Act was triggered by the complexity of creating the low-cost railways that were needed at the time in rural areas, and by the successful use of tramway rules to create the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway in 1882, which was in fact a light railway in all but name.
The Regulation of Railways Act 1868 had permitted the construction of light railways subject to '...such conditions and regulations as the Board of Trade may from time to time impose or make'; for such railways it specified a maximum permitted axle weight and stated that '...the regulations respecting the speed of trains shall not authorize a speed exceeding at any time twenty-five miles an hour'. The Light Railways Act 1896 did not specify any exceptions or limitations that should apply to light railways; it did not even attempt to define a 'light railway'. However, it gave powers to the Light Railway Commissioners to include 'provisions for the safety of the public... as they think necessary for the proper construction and working of the railway' in any light railway order (LRO) granted under the Act. These could limit vehicle axle weights and speeds: the maximum speed of 25 miles per hour (mph) often associated with the Light Railways Act 1896 is not specified in the Act but was a product of the earlier 1868 Act. However, limits were particularly needed when lightly laid track and relatively modest bridges were used in order to keep costs down. LROs could also exempt light railways from some of the requirements of a normal railway: level crossings did not have to be protected by gates, but only by cattle grids, saving the cost of both the gates and a keeper to operate them. It did not exclude standard-gauge track, but narrow gauge tracks were used for many railways built under its provisions. Many of the railways built under the auspices of the Act were very basic, with little or no signalling (many ran under the 'one engine in steam' principle).
A number of municipal and company-owned street tramways were built or extended by the Act, in preference to the Tramways Act 1870. The procedure of the 1896 Act was simpler, permission easier to obtain (local authorities had the right to veto lines under the 1870 legislation), and there was a 75% savings on rates payable as compared to a tramway.
The Light Railways Act was never a great success. By the 1920s the use of road transport had killed the majority of these little railways, although some survived thanks to clever management and tight financial control.
Until the Transport and Works Act 1992 introduced transport works orders, heritage railways in the UK were operated under light railway orders.
| 2
|
[
"Light Railways Act 1896",
"country",
"United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland"
] |
The Light Railways Act 1896 (59 & 60 Vict. c.48) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.History
Before the Act each new railway line built in the country required a specific Act of Parliament to be obtained by the company that wished to construct it, which greatly added to the cost and time it took to construct new railways. The economic downturn of the 1880s had hit agriculture and rural communities in the United Kingdom especially hard and the government wished to facilitate the construction of railways in rural areas, especially to facilitate the transport of goods. The 1896 Act defined a class of railways which did not require specific legislation to construct – companies could simply plan a line under the auspices of the new Act, and, having obtained a light railway order, build and operate it. By reducing the legal costs and allowing new railways to be built quickly the government hoped to encourage companies to build the new 'light railways' in areas of low population and industry that were previously of little interest to them.
A light railway is not a tramway but a separate class of railway. The Act was triggered by the complexity of creating the low-cost railways that were needed at the time in rural areas, and by the successful use of tramway rules to create the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway in 1882, which was in fact a light railway in all but name.
The Regulation of Railways Act 1868 had permitted the construction of light railways subject to '...such conditions and regulations as the Board of Trade may from time to time impose or make'; for such railways it specified a maximum permitted axle weight and stated that '...the regulations respecting the speed of trains shall not authorize a speed exceeding at any time twenty-five miles an hour'. The Light Railways Act 1896 did not specify any exceptions or limitations that should apply to light railways; it did not even attempt to define a 'light railway'. However, it gave powers to the Light Railway Commissioners to include 'provisions for the safety of the public... as they think necessary for the proper construction and working of the railway' in any light railway order (LRO) granted under the Act. These could limit vehicle axle weights and speeds: the maximum speed of 25 miles per hour (mph) often associated with the Light Railways Act 1896 is not specified in the Act but was a product of the earlier 1868 Act. However, limits were particularly needed when lightly laid track and relatively modest bridges were used in order to keep costs down. LROs could also exempt light railways from some of the requirements of a normal railway: level crossings did not have to be protected by gates, but only by cattle grids, saving the cost of both the gates and a keeper to operate them. It did not exclude standard-gauge track, but narrow gauge tracks were used for many railways built under its provisions. Many of the railways built under the auspices of the Act were very basic, with little or no signalling (many ran under the 'one engine in steam' principle).
A number of municipal and company-owned street tramways were built or extended by the Act, in preference to the Tramways Act 1870. The procedure of the 1896 Act was simpler, permission easier to obtain (local authorities had the right to veto lines under the 1870 legislation), and there was a 75% savings on rates payable as compared to a tramway.
The Light Railways Act was never a great success. By the 1920s the use of road transport had killed the majority of these little railways, although some survived thanks to clever management and tight financial control.
Until the Transport and Works Act 1992 introduced transport works orders, heritage railways in the UK were operated under light railway orders.
| 3
|
[
"Gambia Independence Act 1964",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Gambia Independence Act 1964 (1964 c. 93) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that gave independence to The Gambia with effect from 18 February 1965. The Act also provided for the continued right of appeal from the Gambian courts to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which was abolished in 1998 when Yahya Jammeh decided to reorganise the Gambian judiciary under the 1997 Constitution of The Gambia, which replaced the 1970 Constitution of The Gambia that had been suspended after the 1994 Gambian coup d'état on 22 July 1994.
| 4
|
[
"Gambia Independence Act 1964",
"main subject",
"Commonwealth realm of the Gambia"
] |
The Gambia Independence Act 1964 (1964 c. 93) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that gave independence to The Gambia with effect from 18 February 1965. The Act also provided for the continued right of appeal from the Gambian courts to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which was abolished in 1998 when Yahya Jammeh decided to reorganise the Gambian judiciary under the 1997 Constitution of The Gambia, which replaced the 1970 Constitution of The Gambia that had been suspended after the 1994 Gambian coup d'état on 22 July 1994.
| 8
|
[
"Local Government Act 1972",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Local Government Act 1972 (c. 70) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that reformed local government in England and Wales on 1 April 1974. It was one of the most significant Acts of Parliament to be passed by the Heath Government of 1970–74.
Its pattern of two-tier metropolitan and non-metropolitan county and district councils remains in use today in large parts of England, although the metropolitan county councils were abolished in 1986, and both county and district councils have been replaced with unitary authorities in many areas since the 1990s. In Wales, too, the Act established a similar pattern of counties and districts, but these have since been entirely replaced with a system of unitary authorities.
Elections were held to the new authorities in 1973, and they acted as "shadow authorities" until the handover date. Elections to county councils were held on 12 April, for metropolitan and Welsh districts on 10 May, and for non-metropolitan district councils on 7 June.
| 0
|
[
"Local Government Act 1972",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Local Government Act 1972 (c. 70) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that reformed local government in England and Wales on 1 April 1974. It was one of the most significant Acts of Parliament to be passed by the Heath Government of 1970–74.
Its pattern of two-tier metropolitan and non-metropolitan county and district councils remains in use today in large parts of England, although the metropolitan county councils were abolished in 1986, and both county and district councils have been replaced with unitary authorities in many areas since the 1990s. In Wales, too, the Act established a similar pattern of counties and districts, but these have since been entirely replaced with a system of unitary authorities.
Elections were held to the new authorities in 1973, and they acted as "shadow authorities" until the handover date. Elections to county councils were held on 12 April, for metropolitan and Welsh districts on 10 May, and for non-metropolitan district councils on 7 June.
| 1
|
[
"Local Government Act 1972",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Local Government Act 1972 (c. 70) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that reformed local government in England and Wales on 1 April 1974. It was one of the most significant Acts of Parliament to be passed by the Heath Government of 1970–74.
Its pattern of two-tier metropolitan and non-metropolitan county and district councils remains in use today in large parts of England, although the metropolitan county councils were abolished in 1986, and both county and district councils have been replaced with unitary authorities in many areas since the 1990s. In Wales, too, the Act established a similar pattern of counties and districts, but these have since been entirely replaced with a system of unitary authorities.
Elections were held to the new authorities in 1973, and they acted as "shadow authorities" until the handover date. Elections to county councils were held on 12 April, for metropolitan and Welsh districts on 10 May, and for non-metropolitan district councils on 7 June.
| 3
|
[
"Local Government Act 1972",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Local Government Act 1972 (c. 70) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that reformed local government in England and Wales on 1 April 1974. It was one of the most significant Acts of Parliament to be passed by the Heath Government of 1970–74.
Its pattern of two-tier metropolitan and non-metropolitan county and district councils remains in use today in large parts of England, although the metropolitan county councils were abolished in 1986, and both county and district councils have been replaced with unitary authorities in many areas since the 1990s. In Wales, too, the Act established a similar pattern of counties and districts, but these have since been entirely replaced with a system of unitary authorities.
Elections were held to the new authorities in 1973, and they acted as "shadow authorities" until the handover date. Elections to county councils were held on 12 April, for metropolitan and Welsh districts on 10 May, and for non-metropolitan district councils on 7 June.
| 8
|
[
"Government of Wales Act 1998",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Government of Wales Act 1998 (c. 38) (Welsh: Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru 1998) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Passed in 1998, the act created the National Assembly for Wales, Auditor General for Wales and transferred devolved powers to the assembly. The act followed the 1997 Welsh devolution referendum.
| 0
|
[
"Government of Wales Act 1998",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Government of Wales Act 1998 (c. 38) (Welsh: Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru 1998) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Passed in 1998, the act created the National Assembly for Wales, Auditor General for Wales and transferred devolved powers to the assembly. The act followed the 1997 Welsh devolution referendum.
| 1
|
[
"Government of Wales Act 1998",
"language of work or name",
"English"
] |
The Government of Wales Act 1998 (c. 38) (Welsh: Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru 1998) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Passed in 1998, the act created the National Assembly for Wales, Auditor General for Wales and transferred devolved powers to the assembly. The act followed the 1997 Welsh devolution referendum.Act
The Government for Wales Act 1998 brought about the then National Assembly for Wales as a corporate body.Under the 1998 act, the Welsh Assembly received powers to legislate on powers previously held by the Secretary of State for Wales. Powers included agriculture, forestry, fisheries and food; ancient monuments and historic buildings; culture (including museums, galleries and libraries); economic development; education and training; the environment; health and health services; highways; housing; industry; local government; social services; sport and recreation; tourism; town and country planning; transport; water and flood defence; the Welsh language.The Act also established the Auditor General for Wales and the Welsh Administration Ombudsman and also gave the National Assembly for Wales the ability to reorganise some Welsh public bodies.
| 2
|
[
"Government of Wales Act 1998",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Government of Wales Act 1998 (c. 38) (Welsh: Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru 1998) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Passed in 1998, the act created the National Assembly for Wales, Auditor General for Wales and transferred devolved powers to the assembly. The act followed the 1997 Welsh devolution referendum.Act
The Government for Wales Act 1998 brought about the then National Assembly for Wales as a corporate body.Under the 1998 act, the Welsh Assembly received powers to legislate on powers previously held by the Secretary of State for Wales. Powers included agriculture, forestry, fisheries and food; ancient monuments and historic buildings; culture (including museums, galleries and libraries); economic development; education and training; the environment; health and health services; highways; housing; industry; local government; social services; sport and recreation; tourism; town and country planning; transport; water and flood defence; the Welsh language.The Act also established the Auditor General for Wales and the Welsh Administration Ombudsman and also gave the National Assembly for Wales the ability to reorganise some Welsh public bodies.
| 3
|
[
"Government of Wales Act 1998",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Government of Wales Act 1998 (c. 38) (Welsh: Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru 1998) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Passed in 1998, the act created the National Assembly for Wales, Auditor General for Wales and transferred devolved powers to the assembly. The act followed the 1997 Welsh devolution referendum.Act
The Government for Wales Act 1998 brought about the then National Assembly for Wales as a corporate body.Under the 1998 act, the Welsh Assembly received powers to legislate on powers previously held by the Secretary of State for Wales. Powers included agriculture, forestry, fisheries and food; ancient monuments and historic buildings; culture (including museums, galleries and libraries); economic development; education and training; the environment; health and health services; highways; housing; industry; local government; social services; sport and recreation; tourism; town and country planning; transport; water and flood defence; the Welsh language.The Act also established the Auditor General for Wales and the Welsh Administration Ombudsman and also gave the National Assembly for Wales the ability to reorganise some Welsh public bodies.
| 4
|
[
"Sunday Trading Act 1994",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Sunday Trading Act 1994 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom governing the right of shops in England and Wales to trade on a Sunday. Buying and selling on Sunday had previously been illegal, with exceptions, under the Shops Act 1950.
| 0
|
[
"Sunday Trading Act 1994",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Sunday Trading Act 1994 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom governing the right of shops in England and Wales to trade on a Sunday. Buying and selling on Sunday had previously been illegal, with exceptions, under the Shops Act 1950.
| 1
|
[
"Sunday Trading Act 1994",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Sunday Trading Act 1994 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom governing the right of shops in England and Wales to trade on a Sunday. Buying and selling on Sunday had previously been illegal, with exceptions, under the Shops Act 1950.
| 3
|
[
"Sunday Trading Act 1994",
"main subject",
"Sunday trading"
] |
The Sunday Trading Act 1994 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom governing the right of shops in England and Wales to trade on a Sunday. Buying and selling on Sunday had previously been illegal, with exceptions, under the Shops Act 1950.
| 4
|
[
"Sunday Trading Act 1994",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Sunday Trading Act 1994 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom governing the right of shops in England and Wales to trade on a Sunday. Buying and selling on Sunday had previously been illegal, with exceptions, under the Shops Act 1950.
| 5
|
[
"Protection of Military Remains Act 1986",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 (1986 c. 35) is an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom that provides protection for the wreckage of military aircraft and designated military vessels. The Act provides for two types of protection: protected places and controlled sites. Military aircraft are automatically protected, but vessels have to be specifically designated. The primary reason for designation is to protect as a 'war grave' the last resting place of British servicemen (or other nationals); however, the Act does not require the loss of the vessel to have occurred during war.There have been seven statutory instruments designating wrecks under the Act, in 2002 (amended 2003), 2006, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2017 and 2019. Thirteen wrecks are designated as controlled sites, on which diving is banned. These vessels (including one German submarine), all lost on military service, provide a small representative sample of all such vessels. All other vessels that meet the criteria of the act are subject to a rolling programme of assessment and those that meet the criteria will be designated as protected places. The order that is currently in force, since September 2019, designates 93 wrecks as protected places. This means that diving is allowed, but divers must follow the rule of look, don't touch.
| 0
|
[
"Protection of Military Remains Act 1986",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 (1986 c. 35) is an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom that provides protection for the wreckage of military aircraft and designated military vessels. The Act provides for two types of protection: protected places and controlled sites. Military aircraft are automatically protected, but vessels have to be specifically designated. The primary reason for designation is to protect as a 'war grave' the last resting place of British servicemen (or other nationals); however, the Act does not require the loss of the vessel to have occurred during war.There have been seven statutory instruments designating wrecks under the Act, in 2002 (amended 2003), 2006, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2017 and 2019. Thirteen wrecks are designated as controlled sites, on which diving is banned. These vessels (including one German submarine), all lost on military service, provide a small representative sample of all such vessels. All other vessels that meet the criteria of the act are subject to a rolling programme of assessment and those that meet the criteria will be designated as protected places. The order that is currently in force, since September 2019, designates 93 wrecks as protected places. This means that diving is allowed, but divers must follow the rule of look, don't touch.
| 1
|
[
"Protection of Military Remains Act 1986",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 (1986 c. 35) is an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom that provides protection for the wreckage of military aircraft and designated military vessels. The Act provides for two types of protection: protected places and controlled sites. Military aircraft are automatically protected, but vessels have to be specifically designated. The primary reason for designation is to protect as a 'war grave' the last resting place of British servicemen (or other nationals); however, the Act does not require the loss of the vessel to have occurred during war.There have been seven statutory instruments designating wrecks under the Act, in 2002 (amended 2003), 2006, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2017 and 2019. Thirteen wrecks are designated as controlled sites, on which diving is banned. These vessels (including one German submarine), all lost on military service, provide a small representative sample of all such vessels. All other vessels that meet the criteria of the act are subject to a rolling programme of assessment and those that meet the criteria will be designated as protected places. The order that is currently in force, since September 2019, designates 93 wrecks as protected places. This means that diving is allowed, but divers must follow the rule of look, don't touch.
| 3
|
[
"Protection of Military Remains Act 1986",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 (1986 c. 35) is an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom that provides protection for the wreckage of military aircraft and designated military vessels. The Act provides for two types of protection: protected places and controlled sites. Military aircraft are automatically protected, but vessels have to be specifically designated. The primary reason for designation is to protect as a 'war grave' the last resting place of British servicemen (or other nationals); however, the Act does not require the loss of the vessel to have occurred during war.There have been seven statutory instruments designating wrecks under the Act, in 2002 (amended 2003), 2006, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2017 and 2019. Thirteen wrecks are designated as controlled sites, on which diving is banned. These vessels (including one German submarine), all lost on military service, provide a small representative sample of all such vessels. All other vessels that meet the criteria of the act are subject to a rolling programme of assessment and those that meet the criteria will be designated as protected places. The order that is currently in force, since September 2019, designates 93 wrecks as protected places. This means that diving is allowed, but divers must follow the rule of look, don't touch.
| 4
|
[
"Reform Act 1832",
"instance of",
"election act"
] |
Boroughs
Parliamentary boroughs in England ranged widely in size from small hamlets to large cities, partly because they had evolved haphazardly. The earliest boroughs were chosen in the Middle Ages by county sheriffs, and even a village might be deemed a borough. Many of these early boroughs (such as Winchelsea and Dunwich) were substantial settlements at the time of their original enfranchisement, but later went into decline, and by the early 19th century some only had a few electors, but still elected two MPs; they were often known as rotten boroughs. Of the 70 English boroughs that Tudor monarchs enfranchised, 31 were later disenfranchised. Finally, the parliamentarians of the 17th century compounded the inconsistencies by re-enfranchising 15 boroughs whose representation had lapsed for centuries, seven of which were later disenfranchised by the Reform Act. After Newark was enfranchised in 1661, no additional boroughs were enfranchised, and, with the sole exception of Grampound's 1821 disenfranchisement, the system remained unchanged until the Reform Act of 1832. Most English boroughs elected two MPs; but five boroughs elected only one MP: Abingdon, Banbury, Bewdley, Higham Ferrers and Monmouth. The City of London and the joint borough of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis each elected four members. The Welsh boroughs each returned a single member.26 English counties were divided into two divisions with each division being represented by two members.
8 English counties and 3 Welsh counties each received an additional representative.
Yorkshire, which was represented by four MPs before the Act, was given an extra two MPs (so that each of its three ridings was represented by two MPs).
22 large towns were given two MPs.
Another 21 towns (of which two were in Wales) were given one MP.Thus 65 new county seats and 65 new borough seats were created in England and Wales. The total number of English members fell by 17 and the number in Wales increased by four. The boundaries of the new divisions and parliamentary boroughs were defined in a separate Act, the Parliamentary Boundaries Act 1832.Extension of the franchise
The Act also extended the franchise. In county constituencies, in addition to forty-shilling freeholders, franchise rights were extended to owners of land in copyhold worth £10 and holders of long-term leases (more than sixty years) on land worth £10 and holders of medium-term leases (between twenty and sixty years) on land worth £50 and to tenants-at-will paying an annual rent of £50. In borough constituencies all male householders living in properties worth at least £10 a year were given the right to vote – a measure which introduced to all boroughs a standardised form of franchise for the first time. Existing borough electors retained a lifetime right to vote, however they had qualified, provided they were resident in the boroughs in which they were electors. In those boroughs which had freemen electors, voting rights were to be enjoyed by future freemen as well, provided their freemanship was acquired through birth or apprenticeship and they too were resident.The Act also introduced a system of voter registration, to be administered by the overseers of the poor in every parish and township. It instituted a system of special courts to review disputes relating to voter qualifications. It also authorised the use of multiple polling places within the same constituency, and limited the duration of polling to two days. (Formerly, polls could remain open for up to forty days.)The Reform Act itself did not affect constituencies in Scotland or Ireland. However, there were also reforms there, under the Scottish Reform Act and the Irish Reform Act. Scotland received eight additional seats, and Ireland received five; thus keeping the total number of seats in the House of Commons the same as it had been before the Act. While no constituencies were disfranchised in either of those countries, voter qualifications were standardised and the size of the electorate was increased in both.England's frenzy over the Reform Bill in 1831, coupled with the effect of the bill itself upon its enactment in 1832, unleashed a wave of political modernization that the Whig Party eagerly harnessed and the Tory Party grudgingly, but no less effectively, embraced. Reform quickly destroyed the political system that had prevailed during the long reign of George III and replaced it with an essentially modern electoral system based on rigid partisanship and clearly articulated political principle. Hardly "modest" in its consequences, the Reform Act could scarcely have caused a more drastic alteration in England's political fabric.Likewise Eric Evans concludes that the Reform Act "opened a door on a new political world". Although Grey's intentions were conservative, Evans says, and the 1832 Act gave the aristocracy an additional half-century's control of Parliament, the Act nevertheless did open constitutional questions for further development. Evans argues it was the 1832 Act, not the later reforms of 1867, 1884, or 1918, that were decisive in bringing representative democracy to Britain. Evans concludes the Reform Act marked the true beginning of the development of a recognisably modern political system.
| 4
|
[
"Constitutional Reform Act 2005",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c 4) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, relevant to UK constitutional law. It provides for a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom to take over the previous appellate jurisdiction of the Law Lords as well as some powers of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and removed the functions of Speaker of the House of Lords and Head of the Judiciary of England and Wales from the office of Lord Chancellor.
| 0
|
[
"Constitutional Reform Act 2005",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c 4) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, relevant to UK constitutional law. It provides for a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom to take over the previous appellate jurisdiction of the Law Lords as well as some powers of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and removed the functions of Speaker of the House of Lords and Head of the Judiciary of England and Wales from the office of Lord Chancellor.
| 1
|
[
"Constitutional Reform Act 2005",
"instance of",
"Public General Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c 4) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, relevant to UK constitutional law. It provides for a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom to take over the previous appellate jurisdiction of the Law Lords as well as some powers of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and removed the functions of Speaker of the House of Lords and Head of the Judiciary of England and Wales from the office of Lord Chancellor.Abolition of the office of "Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain", generally known as the Lord Chancellor.
Setting up of a "Supreme Court of the United Kingdom" and moving the Law Lords out of the House of Lords to this new court.
Other measures relating to the judiciary, including changes to the position of the Lord Chief Justice and changes to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.The bill caused much controversy and the Lords made amendments to it. The most significant of these was the decision not to abolish the position of Lord Chancellor, as, unlike other Secretaries of State in the UK Government, a number of the Lord Chancellor's functions are explicitly defined in law, and transferring these functions to other individuals would have required further legislation. However, although the post was retained, its role in relation to the judiciary is greatly reduced and the office holder is no longer automatically Speaker of the House of Lords because of the Government's announced intention to appoint Lord Chancellors from the House of Commons. Other measures remained generally the same as stated above.
The newly created Cabinet position of Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs (originally created to wholly replace the Lord Chancellor's executive function) continued, although the holder of that Cabinet post—renamed Secretary of State for Justice in 2007—currently also holds the office of Lord Chancellor. The Lord Chancellor remains the custodian of the Great Seal (the bill as originally written put this into commission).
The bill was approved by both Houses on 21 March 2005, and received Royal Assent on 24 March.
| 3
|
[
"Constitutional Reform Act 2005",
"legislated by",
"Parliament of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c 4) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, relevant to UK constitutional law. It provides for a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom to take over the previous appellate jurisdiction of the Law Lords as well as some powers of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and removed the functions of Speaker of the House of Lords and Head of the Judiciary of England and Wales from the office of Lord Chancellor.Abolition of the office of "Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain", generally known as the Lord Chancellor.
Setting up of a "Supreme Court of the United Kingdom" and moving the Law Lords out of the House of Lords to this new court.
Other measures relating to the judiciary, including changes to the position of the Lord Chief Justice and changes to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.The bill caused much controversy and the Lords made amendments to it. The most significant of these was the decision not to abolish the position of Lord Chancellor, as, unlike other Secretaries of State in the UK Government, a number of the Lord Chancellor's functions are explicitly defined in law, and transferring these functions to other individuals would have required further legislation. However, although the post was retained, its role in relation to the judiciary is greatly reduced and the office holder is no longer automatically Speaker of the House of Lords because of the Government's announced intention to appoint Lord Chancellors from the House of Commons. Other measures remained generally the same as stated above.
The newly created Cabinet position of Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs (originally created to wholly replace the Lord Chancellor's executive function) continued, although the holder of that Cabinet post—renamed Secretary of State for Justice in 2007—currently also holds the office of Lord Chancellor. The Lord Chancellor remains the custodian of the Great Seal (the bill as originally written put this into commission).
The bill was approved by both Houses on 21 March 2005, and received Royal Assent on 24 March.
| 5
|
[
"Constitutional Reform Act 2005",
"main subject",
"Supreme Court of the United Kingdom"
] |
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c 4) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, relevant to UK constitutional law. It provides for a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom to take over the previous appellate jurisdiction of the Law Lords as well as some powers of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and removed the functions of Speaker of the House of Lords and Head of the Judiciary of England and Wales from the office of Lord Chancellor.
| 6
|
[
"Hunting Act 2004",
"country",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Hunting Act 2004 (c 37) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which bans the hunting of most wild mammals (notably foxes, deer, hares and mink) with dogs in England and Wales, subject to some strictly limited exemptions; the Act does not cover the use of dogs in the process of flushing out an unidentified wild mammal, nor does it affect drag hunting, where hounds are trained to follow an artificial scent.The Act came into force on 18 February 2005. The pursuit of foxes with hounds, other than to flush out to be shot, had been banned in Scotland two years earlier by the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002. Such hunting remains permitted by the law in Northern Ireland, where the Act does not apply.
| 0
|
[
"Hunting Act 2004",
"applies to jurisdiction",
"United Kingdom"
] |
The Hunting Act 2004 (c 37) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which bans the hunting of most wild mammals (notably foxes, deer, hares and mink) with dogs in England and Wales, subject to some strictly limited exemptions; the Act does not cover the use of dogs in the process of flushing out an unidentified wild mammal, nor does it affect drag hunting, where hounds are trained to follow an artificial scent.The Act came into force on 18 February 2005. The pursuit of foxes with hounds, other than to flush out to be shot, had been banned in Scotland two years earlier by the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002. Such hunting remains permitted by the law in Northern Ireland, where the Act does not apply.
| 1
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.