Essay Title: “A core function of any Supreme Court is to challenge, or even strike down, legislation that the judiciary regards as incorrect. By denying the Supreme Court for the United Kingdom this function, a Supreme Court has been created in name but not in function. It would be better if no change had been made at all.” Discuss. Introduction of the Supreme Court The Supreme Court formally the House of Lords originated from the Curia Regis who was the queen’s advisors on law, and was introduced by part3 of the constitutional reform act (2005). The judicial functions of the House of Lords were assumed by the 12 lords of appeal in ordinary otherwise known as “law lords”.
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.
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.
Political culture is a reflection of the government, but also incorporates elements of history and tradition that may anticipate the current system. An example of this is - the United States and Great Britain which are both democracies, but each nation has a distinct political culture. Great Britain consists of a long history of feudalism and has never had a written constitution. (Contrasts between the American and British Political System, Roger Darlington, August 2013) Even though the current monarch holds the official title of head of state, the monarchy’s powers are nominal, leaving Parliament (the legislative body) as the dominant element of the government The American government, in contrast, derives its’ power from a written constitution drafted by men who feared monarchs and strong central governments, which is why the federal government was divided into three distinct branches.
In ‘The Concept of the Political’ we are informed by the very first sentence ‘the concept of the state presupposes the concept of the political’, his decision to firstly note the importance of defining the political can be linked to his legal training, having dealt with lawyers. For Schmitt the state defines the political, and the political is defined by his distinction of friend and enemy. This antagonism between friend and enemy is uses to suggest the impossibility of perpetual peace, and political actions can be distinguished via this antagonism. The enemy is not ones moral enemy, the enemy is ‘the other’. Important for Schmitt’s, is that one understands that today’s enemy could be tomorrows friend, thus there is no internal enemy.
Unique Characteristics of Domestic Violence Cases Derived from English common law, the American legal system had a long tradition of regarding domestic violence as a private family matter, not subject to criminal prosecution. Early American courts held that husbands acted within their rights when they beat and abused their wives in response to what husbands described as their wives’ ‘‘misbehavior.’’ This view of domestic violence as a private family matter stemmed from a larger body of law and social custom that denied women a separate identity of their own. Indeed, the American legal system did not criminalize domestic violence until the late nineteenth century. It was not until 1871 that a state court, the Supreme Court of Alabama, in Fulgham v. State, determined for the first time that a husband did not have the right to beat his wife. In the years following this decision, several states began adopting laws against domestic violence that made wife beating a crime.
Parliament was thus active under the Tudors, and exceptionally active in the reign of Henry VIII. Activity is perhaps the striking point, when we consider the question in a European context. The 16th century saw the rise of strong European monarchies and the extension of the civil law. But in England, the Roman civil law was not received; common law was sovereign after the Reformation Parliament and the break with Rome. The English common law, taught in the Inns of Court, was secure as the foundation of the Tudor state; and common law being secure,
It appears to be predominately of Anglo-Saxon common law origin. Clearly, it precedes Magna Carta in 1215. Although the precise origin of Habeas Corpus is uncertain in light of it’s antiquity, its principle effect was achieved in the middle ages by various writs, the sum collection of which gave a similar effect as the modern writ. Although practice surrounding the writ has evolved over time, Habeas Corpus has since the earliest times been employed to compel the appearance of a person who is in custody to be brought before a court. And while Habeas Corpus originally was the prerogative writ of the King and his courts, the passage of hundreds of years time has permitted it to evolve into a prerogative writ initiated by the person restrained, or someone acting in his interest rather
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.
The History of Modern Law Enforcement The History of Modern Law Enforcement 1/29/2012 1/29/2012 Norman Cartwright Theory and Practice of Law Enforcement CJE2061 Section 70 Norman Cartwright Theory and Practice of Law Enforcement CJE2061 Section 70 American Law Enforcement is greatly derived from English Common Law, dating back to the eleventh century. Then, in England, there were large communities known as “shires” and the king would appoint a royal officer, called a “reeve” as the chief law enforcement officer for the shire. But as time passed the “shires” grew and areas began to industrialize it became evident that there was a need for a change in law enforcement. Modernization was exactly what law enforcement received with the assistance of Sir Robert Peel. Peel persuaded the English Parliament to create the first uniformed police force, The London Metropolitan Police, in 1829 (Walker/Katz, 2011: 25).