9 Part H Consolidation The purpose of this part is to bring together your knowledge of law making in the English legal system. Through a series of activities you will be provided with the opportunity to review and consolidate your knowledge of the English legal system gained so far. 8.2 Summary of Part G In Part G you have explored the difference between common law and civil law systems. Except for third party materials and otherwise stated (see terms and conditions), this content is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Licence 8.1 The differences between common law and civil law systems Having explored the origins and development of the common law and its characteristics, the final part of this unit will compare and contrast the common law with civil legal systems. The terms common law system and civil law system are used to distinguish two distinct legal systems and approaches to law. The use of the term ‘common law’ in this context refers to all those legal systems which have adopted the historic English legal system. Foremost amongst these is, of course, th 7.3 Summary of Part F In Part F, we have compared and contrasted: common law and equity common law and statute law. Except for third party materials and otherwise stated (see terms and conditions), this content is made available under a Creati 7.2 Statute law and common law The ‘common law’ means the substantive law and procedural rules that have been created by the judges through the decisions in the cases they have heard. I have here lumped together two types of common law: substantive law and procedural law. Let me explain the difference between them. A substantive rule is a rule about our behaviour, for example, that we cannot commit murder or that we will be forming a contract if we do such-and-such on an email exchange. These substantive rul 7.1 Equity This term refers to a particular division within the English legal system. As the common law progressed, there developed a formality among judges, typified by a reluctance to deal with matters that were not or could not be processed in the proper form of action. Such a refusal to deal with injustices because they did not fall within the particular procedural and formal constraints, led to much dissatisfaction with the legal system. A modern analogy would be with a company or Government depart 6.9 Summary of Part E 4.1 Introduction You cannot cite precedents to a judge and ask him or her to follow them if you don't have a good record of all the earlier cases and how they were decided. The operation of binding precedent, therefore, relies on the existence of an extensive reporting service to provide access to previous judicial decisions. This section will briefly set out where you might locate case reports on particular areas of the law. This is of particular importance to advocates (usually barristers but s 3.5 Summary of Part B In Part B you have learned that: the system of precedent requires later courts to use the same reasoning as an earlier court, where two cases raise the same legal issues; the contents of a case report can be divided into two categories:
ratio decidendi – the statement of legal principles essential to the decision. The ratio is the binding element of the case 3.4.3 Summary of binding precedent In this section you have seen: that not everything in a court case sets a precedent the difference between ratio decidendi (the statement of legal principles material to the decision) and obiter dictum (the discussion of legal principles raised in argument but not material to the decision) that the binding element in a future case is the ratio and that, while the obiter will never be bindin 3.4.2 Distinguishing In comparison with the mechanism of overruling, which is rarely used, the main device for avoiding binding precedent is that of distinguishing. As has been previously stated, the ratio decidendi of any case is based upon the material facts of the case. This opens up the possibility that a court may regard the facts of the case before it as significantly different from the facts of a cited precedent, so it will not find itself bound to follow that precedent. Judges use the device of dis 3.4.1 Overruling Overruling is the procedure whereby a court higher up in the hierarchy sets aside a legal ruling established in a previous case. It is strange that, within the system of stare decisis, precedents gain increased authority with the passage of time. As a consequence, courts tend to be reluctant to overrule longstanding authorities even though they may no longer accurately reflect contemporary practices or morals. While old principles are not usually good in dentistry or computer sci 3.4 Binding precedent Not everything in a court case sets a precedent. The contents of a case report can be divided into two categories: 1. The reason for the decision – ratio decidendi The ratio decidendi of a case is not the actual decision, like ‘guilty’ or ‘the defendant is liable to pay compensation’. The precedent is set by the rule of law used by the judge or judges in deciding the legal problem raised by the facts 3.3.6 Summary of the system of precedent The basis of the system of precedent is the principle of stare decisis and this requires a later court to use the same reasoning as an earlier court where the two cases raise the same legal issues. For example: House of Lords’ decisions are binding on all other courts in the legal system, except the House of Lords itself. The Court of Appeal is bound by previous decisions of the House of Lords. The Court of Appeal generally i 3.3.5 The High Court The High Court is also bound by the decisions of superior courts. Decisions by individual High Court judges are binding on courts inferior in the hierarchy, but such decisions are not binding on other High Court judges, although they are of strong persuasive authority and tend to be followed in practice. It is possible, however, for High Court judges to disagree and for them to reach different conclusions as to the law in a particular area. The question then becomes – how is a later High Co 3.3.4 Divisional courts The legal terminology for these courts is not very straightforward! The High Court is divided into three ‘divisions’, each one dealing with different sorts of cases – the Family Division, the Chancery Division (that deals with property and money cases) and the Queen's Bench Division (that deals with cases involving things like contracts and negligence). Each of these divisions, however, also has the capacity to act as a court to hear appeals from lower courts and, when the judges s 3.3.3 The Court of Appeal The Court of Appeal is always bound by previous decisions of the House of Lords. The Court of Appeal generally is also bound by its own previous decisions. There are, however, a number of exceptions to this general rule. Lord Greene MR listed these exceptions in Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd (1944). 3.3.2 The styling of legal cases Activity 8 asks you to read Reading 1 – a short extract from The English Legal System (Slapper and Kelly, 2003) – and identify what you consider are the advantages of allowing the House of Lords to overrule its previous decisions. This extract provides you with examples of instances when the House of Lords has not followed its own previous decisions. This may be the first time you have read the name of a legal case. Case names are written in a particular style. For example, t 3.3.1 Supreme Court of the United Kingdom This is the highest appeal court in the UK and was created by the Constitutional Reform Act 20045. The court became operational on 1 October 2009. Generally permission to appeal must be sought before a case can be brought to the UK Supreme Court. As the highest court of appeal it hears matters which involve points of law of general public importance and concentrates on cases of the greatest public and constitutional importance. Its decisions are binding on all courts lower in the court Tech Crew: Assemble!
Activity 18 Common law
Rule, approach or aid
Comment
Cases
The literal rule
Uses plain ordinary grammatical meaning of words and avoids judicial law making, but can lead to absurd decisions and injustices and assumes unattainable perfection in draftsmanship
Fisher v Bell (1960)
The golden rule
This start
...from the Tech Crew Alliance comes... "a short but concise guide to the touring industry" - a powerful piece of documentary footage. (10:00)
Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 8447 result(s) returned
Author(s):
Pages
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423
Copyright 2009 University of Nottingham