The British constitution is not codified this denotes that there is no body of rules which could be set to form an act of foundation. Leyland affirms that albeit there is not a fundamental body of law relating to the constitution, there are key constitutional sources which enable us to a description of it. Turpin and Tomkings state that some of these sources consist of legal rules of the constitution, while the others, are rules of practice, known as ‘constitutional conventions’. Broadly laws and conventions are diverse by virtue of where they have originated, enforceability, practice, and accountability. However, this distinction is blurring in some of these aspects. This paper intends to scrutinize these features in order to assess whether there is an accurate distinction between laws and convention.