Outline Intrinsic and Extrinsic Aids Intrinsic and Extrinsic Aids are used to help judges interpret pieces of legislation and apply it to cases. They can also help define words within legislation so parliament’s intentions can be met. Intrinsic Aids, also known as internal aids are anything within the Act itself that can help judges with the interpretation of a particular section. The Long title is one of the most useful Intrinsic, it describes in general terms the purpose of the Act which makes complex words easier to understand so the true purpose of the Act can is met. The Explanatory memorandum is also very useful in finding parliaments true intention, an Explanatory memorandum accompanies all statutes since 1998 and sets out the purpose of the Act.
Sample multiple-choice questions for the English Legal System module for LLB open learning 1. Which of the statements below most accurately reflects the constitutional position between the legislature and the judiciary: a) Parliament encourages the judiciary to make law through the process of statutory interpretation because it does not have enough parliamentary time to enact laws itself. b) Parliament is the supreme lawmaking body and the role of the judiciary is to interpret and apply law made by Parliament. c) The judiciary considers itself a primary lawmaking body equal to Parliament. d) It is the role of the judiciary, when interpreting statutes, to fill in the gaps in the statutes.
While there are inherent difficulties in this type of Constitutional tradition, there are also significant benefits. These benefits include relative flexibility or ease in enacting amendments or evolving the law, although there are considerable constraints to safeguard against undue legal change or advancement. The flexibility of the UK constitution is obvious from the substantial number of constitutional reforms since 1997, including the annulment of the greater part of genetic companions in the House of Lords, the presentation of classified privileges of people for the first run through in Human Rights Act 1998, and devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Apparently, however, these recent constitutional reforms may have made the constitution less adaptable in a few regards. This is now a debatable topic in the UK.
Common law, which has developed over many years becoming accepted due to court judgements. The laws and customs of Parliament re also a source of the constitution. Works of authority are also referred to as authoritative sources such as books by Dicey or Bagehot. Finally, European Union Law also impacts the UK constitution as the judgements of the European court of Justice, in general EU law has precedence over that passed by Parliament. A codified constitution is too inflexible and cannot adapt to the changing political circumstance, such as society changing.
“The Human Rights Act has revolutionised the way in which judges interpret statutes.” The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) was incorporated into the United Kingdom (UK) law in order to enforce the rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to which the UK is a party. The Human Rights Act or the 1998 Act is said to have a major impact in judicial interpretative practices (Gearey et al). The rules of statutory interpretation were found at common law but the HRA is said to have given new rules on interpretation. Before turning to HRA, the judicial practice of statutory interpretation and the impact of the membership of the European Union need to be considered. The politics of the common law (Gearey et al.)
Essay tittle:’Although the Human Right Acts 1998 has impacted on the Judicial understanding of precedent,the underlying features Of the doctrine remain unchanged.’ The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on one the concept that like cases must be treated alike.The doctrine is based on the notion of stare decisis et non quieta movere,meaning to stand by decisions and not disturb that which is settled.In a common law system a huge part of the laws are made up of decided cases ie judge made law or case law.These decisions by the judges carries a great weight therefore necessarily be binding on later judges to ensure certainty and fairness within the system.The precedent of stare decisis safeguards the notion that judges make arbitrary decision.In a common law system precedents is the very essence of what moulds the system and gives it unique character. The Human Rights Act 1998 was intended to protect human rights and civil liberties in domestic law. However, it should not be forgotten that the Act has also affected the general legal system.Perhaps most significantly, the Act creates new rules on the following of precedent, as s.2 of the Act states that the domestic courts must take into account the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights when determining any question involving any Convention right.The inclusion of s.2 in the Act thus begs the question whether the traditional principles of judicial precedent are now abandoned in place of a rule which compels the domestic courts to follow the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights.However, as Convention law was never intended to be supreme over member states' domestic law,and the European Court of Human Rights has always offered member
Question What is constitutionalism? How does it differ from absolutism? Constitutionalism, as opposed to absolutism, balances authority throughout the government. Not only does it create equilibrium in governance, it also gives liberties and rights to its people. It does so by consisting of a set of rules and principles, “.
Judicial Creativity Under the theory of separation of power, Parliament makes UK law while the role of judges is to apply the law to the cases. However, in reality, do judges make/develop the law? Like Lord Radcliffe said in 1968 “there was never a more sterile controversy than upon the question whether a judge makes law. Of course, he does. How can he help it?” Judges in the UK do develop the law through both the operation of the doctrine of judicial precedent and statutory interpretation.
They are then implemented by the executive and enforced by the courts. Statute Law is the most important source of the principles and rules making up the British constitution because parliament is the sovereign body. An example of Statute law include: The Parliament Act (1911), which established the House of Commons as the dominant chamber of parliament. More recent example is The Human Rights Act (1998), which enshrined key rights in UK law. Secondly there is Common Law, Common law includes legal principles that have been developed and applied by UK courts.
The Human Rights Act has revolutionised the way in which judges interpret statutes The statement basically is regards with statutory interpretation, the impact of Human rights act on interpretation and the changing approaches of interpretation influenced by Human right Act 1998 (HRA).The essay will deal with the widespread view that the human Rights Act 1998(HRA) has changed the traditional role of parliamentary intention in statutory interpretation and the way in which judges interpret statutes. It begins by outlining what actually statutory interpretation is and the various ways in which legislative intent has featured in traditional statutory interpretation. This will be followed by an examination of the interpretive principles developed by the senior judiciary under the HRA case law, focusing on the extent to which they seem to depart from traditional principles and whether is it really true that the Human Rights act has radically changed or as the title suggest "revolutionised" the way in which judges interpret statutes or is it just a mirage. Judges interpret statutes as a way of creating law. This occurs when the language in the statute is ambiguous and the judge has to use the rules of interpretation (i.e.