Manuel v Attorney General [1983] Ch 77

This was the case of the Act of Parliament transferring sovereignty to Canada, which was challenged by one province, who argued that the act was invalid because:

1. There was a rule of not changing the constitution without the consent of all the provinces (the CA found that this was a mere convention and not enforceable) and

2. That the Canada Act 1982 was ultra vires since parliament in Westminster did not have the power to legislate for other countries.

However as the initial court (CA avoided this point) said, Parliamentary sovereignty was absolute and though a law might not be enforceable if, for example, Parliament in Westminster declared it illegal to smoke in Delhi, it would nevertheless be recognised by the courts.

The CA also avoided the question of whether Parliament can bind its successors.