AC 1.1 Describe Processes Used for Law Making

Question 1

Green Paper

Answer 1

Consultation paper, suggests ideas, invites relevant parties

Question 2

White Paper

Answer 2

Government’s firm proposals

Question 3

Types of Bills

Answer 3

1. Draft Bill = consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny
2. Public Bills = affects the whole country, put forward by the Government
3. Private Bills = affects individuals/companies, put forward by the Government
4. Private Member Bills = put forward by individual MP

Question 4

First Reading

Answer 4

• Name read out
• No discussion

Question 5

Second Reading

Answer 5

• Minister responsible explains purpose + opposition responds
• Debate to continue

Question 6

Committee Stage

Answer 6

• Bill examined clause by clause
• Standing committee set up with knowledge/interests

Question 7

Report Stage

Answer 7

• Any amendments reported back
• Parliament can accept, reject or add more

Question 8

Third Reading

Answer 8

• Final vote - unlikely to fail
• No changes except spelling and grammar

Question 9

House of Lords

Answer 9

• Same process
• Amendments returned to HOC (ping-pong)
• Can be bypassed because elected body
• Parliament Acts 1922 + 1949

Question 10

Royal Assent

Answer 10

• Monarch signs off the bill
• Purely a formality

Question 11

Commencement

Answer 11

Happens at midnight on day of royal assent

Question 12

The Literal Rule

Answer 12

• Courts use the words plain, ordinary and grammatical meaning even if outcome is absurd
• Often use dictionary (most common, least controversial)
• Judges believe not their job to change wording of an Act
• Heavily criticised for injustices

Question 13

Literal Rule Cases

Answer 13

• Whiteley v Chappel - D not guilty as literal meaning of the words ‘entitled to vote’ were applied and dead person not entitled to vote
• Fisher v Bell - D not guilty, literal rule applied displaying knifes was ITT and not an offer

Question 14

The Golden Rule

Answer 14

• Starts looking at literal meaning, If absurd/injustice then avoid
• Safety valve -> perfectly sensible outcome
• 2 Views:
  
  1. NARROW = choose between 2 meanings, if there is only 1 meaning it must be given
  2. WIDE = the meaning would lead to a bad outcome, can modify the meaning

Question 15

Golden Rule Cases

Answer 15

• R v Allen (NARROW) - ‘shall marry’ was interpreted as going through a ceremony so D guilty
• Re Sigsworth (WIDE) - courts wouldn’t let a murderer benefit from a crime so wide approach used and courts wrote into the act that D couldn’t inherit if they killed the deceased

Question 16

The Mischief Rule

Answer 16

• Used when the relevant statute was aiming to reform an old law
• Judge looks at what the law was like before the statute to see what “mischief” it was trying to cover. Then interprets the act in a way that covers it
• Court must consider
  
  1. Common law before the act was made
  2. Mischief the common law didn’t provide for
  3. Parliament’s remedy
  4. True reason for the remedy

Question 17

Mischief Rule Cases

Answer 17

• Smith v Hughes - the activities of the D’s were within the mischief the Act was aimed at even though under a literal interpretation
• Royal College of Nursing v DHSS - it was legal for nurses to carry out such abortions.The Act was aimed at doing away with back street abortions where no medical care was available. The actions of the nurses were therefore outside the mischief

Question 18

The Purposive Approach

Answer 18

• Goes beyond mischief rule, judge decides what they think Parliament meant to achieve
• Done by looking at the spirit of the law rather than the strict letter
• Tries to give effect to the wider purpose of the law
• Seen as modern version of mischief rule
• Introduced to interpret European Law

Question 19

Purposive Approach Cases

Answer 19

• R v Registrar General ex parte Smith - HOL used purposive approach information not given as Parliament could not have intended to promote a serious crime.
• Jones v Tower Boot Co - COA ruled using purposive approach, Parliament’s intent to eliminate workplace discrimination. Employers were held liable

Question 20

Hierarchy of the Courts

Answer 20

• The Court of Justice of the European Union
• The Supreme Court
• The Court of Appeal
• The High Court
• The Crown Court
• The Inferior Courts (incl County and Mags)

Question 21

What is Stare Decisis? (cases)

Answer 21

• Judges must stand by their decisions where the point of law in the present case and previous case are the same.
• Donoghue v Stevenson = where the manufacturer owed a duty of of care
• Daniels v White = This was used as a judicial precedent in Daniels v White (same point applied)

Question 22

What is Ratio Decidendi? (cases)

Answer 22

• A judgement has a summary of the facts, review of the arguments, explanation of the principles of law, decision.
• If a case with the same or similar facts appears in court later, the ratio decidendi of the previous case is applied

Question 23

What is Obiter Dicta? (cases)

Answer 23

• By the way comments
• Make statements around the decision
• Don’t form part of the decision but may help in future cases
• Judge speculates how the outcome of the case would have been different had the facts of the case been slightly different

Question 24

Distinguishing Precedent

Answer 24

• The facts of the case are significantly different from the earlier case.
• Judge must find important differences between the 2 cases in order for a new precedent to be created.
• Balfour v Balfour -> Meritt v Meritt

Question 25

Reversing Precedent

Answer 25

• When a case goes on appeal and a higher court reverses the decision of a lower court.
• Sweet v Parsley = COA changed the Crown Court’s decision of guilty to not guilty.

Question 26

Overruling Precedent

Answer 26

• A higher court in a later case states the legal rule in a previous case from a lower court was wrong.
• The SC can overrule itself using the Practice Statement
• The COA can overrule itself using the exceptions from Young v Bristol Aeroplane

Question 27

Per Incuriam Precedent

Answer 27

• When a judge in a previous case has overlooked an important point of law and the decision they made was wrong. This decision can be overruled.
• This is rare because judges don’t like to say judges in other cases were wrong.
• Used in Williams v Fawcett

Question 28

What happened in RvR?

Answer 28

• Husband convicted of attempting to rape his wife,
• Appealed because old precedent saying husbands cannot be guilty of rape in marriage
• COA overruled