Rules Navigator

Register

OPINION: Dinsdale Piranha, the Supreme Court, and the death of the separation of powers

The Royal coat of arms and signage pictured on external wall of the Royal Courts Of Justice on the Strand in central London on June 16, 2017 in London,England.
Photo: Peter Dazeley/Getty Images

Roger Gherson | Gherson

 Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window/tab) Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window/tab) Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window/tab) Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window/tab)

The Court should act as a last defense; instead, its abdication exemplified in the Shvidler v FCDO case represents a threat to liberty in Britain, says Roger Gherson.

Montesquieu taught us that liberty survives only where power is divided. The executive, the legislature, and the judiciary must restrain each other, or tyranny will follow. The Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Shvidler v FCDO; Dalston Projects Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [2025] UKSC 30 shows how

Sanctions and

Free Trial

Register for free to keep reading.

To continue reading this article and unlock full access to GRIP, register now. You’ll enjoy free access to all content until our subscription service launches in early 2026.

  • Unlimited access to industry insights
  • Stay on top of key rules and regulatory changes with our Rules Navigator
  • Ad-free experience with no distractions
  • Regular podcasts from trusted external experts
  • Fresh compliance and regulatory content every day
Register for free Already a member? Sign in
, , , , ,
You may also like