Archive:Notwithstanding clause: Difference between revisions
→United Kingdom: +ref |
→United Kingdom: Text on Safety of Rwanda Act |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
===United Kingdom=== | ===United Kingdom=== | ||
In the United Kingdom, legislation has used ''notwithstanding'' language to clarify the relationship between an Act and otherwise applicable domestic or [[international law]]. Examples include: | In the United Kingdom, legislation has used ''notwithstanding'' language to clarify the relationship between an Act and otherwise applicable domestic or [[international law]]. The [[Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024]] stated that its provisions applied notwithstanding specified provisions of the [[Human Rights Act 1998]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024, section 3 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2024/8/section/3/enacted |website=legislation.gov.uk |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref> | ||
Other Examples include: | |||
* [[United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020]]<ref>{{cite web | title=Brick Court Chambers | url=https://www.brickcourt.co.uk/brexit-blog/2021/01 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | title=True (Bad) Faith 2020? Part Two: Excavating the Legal Rationale for the 'Emergency Clauses' in the UK Internal Market Bill – RECONNECT | date=24 November 2020 | url=https://reconnect-europe.eu/blog/true-bad-faith-2020-part-two-excavating-the-legal-rationale-for-the-emergency-clauses-in-the-uk-internal-market-bill/ }}</ref> | * [[United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020]]<ref>{{cite web | title=Brick Court Chambers | url=https://www.brickcourt.co.uk/brexit-blog/2021/01 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | title=True (Bad) Faith 2020? Part Two: Excavating the Legal Rationale for the 'Emergency Clauses' in the UK Internal Market Bill – RECONNECT | date=24 November 2020 | url=https://reconnect-europe.eu/blog/true-bad-faith-2020-part-two-excavating-the-legal-rationale-for-the-emergency-clauses-in-the-uk-internal-market-bill/ }}</ref> | ||
* [[European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020]]<ref>{{cite web |title=European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020, section 38: Explanatory Notes |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/1/notes/division/58/index.htm |website=legislation.gov.uk |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref> | * [[European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020]]<ref>{{cite web |title=European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020, section 38: Explanatory Notes |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/1/notes/division/58/index.htm |website=legislation.gov.uk |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref> | ||
Revision as of 05:53, 29 September 2026
Template:AI-generatedTemplate:Short description Template:For
A notwithstanding clause (French: Clause nonobstant), (Lat: Non Obstante) is a provision in legislation that allows a law to operate despite certain other legal rules, rights, or principles that might otherwise conflict with it. Such clauses are used to assert legislative supremacy and to prevent courts from invalidating or limiting the effect of the statute based on conflicting laws or rights.
Overview
In common law jurisdictions, a notwithstanding clause typically uses language such as "notwithstanding any other provision of this Act" or "notwithstanding any law to the contrary". It signals a clear legislative intent that the provision should take precedence over any inconsistent statutory, common law, or constitutional provisions.
Use
Canada
In some jurisdictions, notwithstanding clauses have been used to override certain constitutional rights where allowed by law, for example Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which allows the charter to be overridden on a time limited basis by provincial legislatures.
United States
It can also be used to ensure that statutory provisions prevail over common law principles such as due process if there is a clash, with Section 1983 of the Ku Klux Klan ActTemplate:Sfn[1]
United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, legislation has used notwithstanding language to clarify the relationship between an Act and otherwise applicable domestic or international law. The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024 stated that its provisions applied notwithstanding specified provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998.[2]
Other Examples include:
Examples
- Supremacy Clause
- Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India
See also
References
- ↑ [Institute for Justice (U.S.), amicus brief discussing Section 1983, p. 3
- ↑ "Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024, section 3". https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2024/8/section/3/enacted.
- ↑ "Brick Court Chambers". https://www.brickcourt.co.uk/brexit-blog/2021/01.
- ↑ "True (Bad) Faith 2020? Part Two: Excavating the Legal Rationale for the 'Emergency Clauses' in the UK Internal Market Bill – RECONNECT". 24 November 2020. https://reconnect-europe.eu/blog/true-bad-faith-2020-part-two-excavating-the-legal-rationale-for-the-emergency-clauses-in-the-uk-internal-market-bill/.
- ↑ "European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020, section 38: Explanatory Notes". https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/1/notes/division/58/index.htm.
Sources
- Jaicomo, Patrick; Nelson, Daniel (2026). "Section 1983 (Still) Displaces Qualified Immunity". Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 49: 151–226. https://research.ebsco.com/c/phimeb/viewer/pdf/v56clsemnb.