>Why? Because that’s not a real law, its a creature of the courts and every time the legislature got involved it was to make a real law Sorry, but that's just

>Why? Because that’s not a real law, its a creature of the courts and every time the legislature got involved it was to make a real law Sorry, but that's just plain wrong. Common law is law, and Parliament, the courts and the government all recognise it as being "real law". There's nothing special about statute law that makes it any more "real" than common law. The only difference is that statute law can do anything, including modifying or abolishing provisions of common law, whereas common law can't expressly contradict statute because of parliamentary sovereignty. (And even parliamentary sovereignty has its theoretical limits - in R (Jackson) v Attorney General the law lords opined in obiter dicta that PS wasn't necessarily absolute)[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_(Jackson)_v_Attorney_General#Limits_to_parliamentary_sovereignty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_(Jackson)_v_Attorney_General...