... for judicial review (courts are upholding the rule of law, because that is what Parliament intends). Yet, albeit not intended to give a new constitutional status to the courts, it is questionable how far the powers given to them when reviewing administrative acts and legislation involving human rights were intended to extend. In relation to legislation, a so called 'soft' form of constitutional review has been adopted. Under s. 3 of the HRA the courts have an interpretative obligation. They must 'so far as it is possible to do so' read and effect to primary and secondary legislation in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights. In comparison to jurisdictions where courts are allowed to invalidate legislation which is incompatible with human right (Bill of Rights), the English courts are only allowed to issue a declaration of incompatibility under s 4 HRA. This however should happen only rarely ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now