AC 1.1 - describe processes used for law making Flashcards
governmental process: people involved
- monarch
- house of commons
- house of lords
governmental process: 1 - consultation stage
- when planning a new law or amending one the government launches a public consultation to discuss proposals
- done through green and white paper
governmental process: 1 - green paper
members of the public are invited to express views on proposals for new laws
governmental process: 1 - white paper
- government publishes a white paper for a formal proposal for a law
- sets out the plan for the law
- public are invited to comment
governmental process: 2 - 1st reading
- name of bill & aims are read out
- formal vote is taken to determine if it goes to the next stage
governmental process: 3 - 2nd reading
- bill is read and debated in full by the House
- vote is taken again
governmental process: 4 - committee stage
- bill is scrutinised by a select committee
- amends are made if necessary
governmental process: 5 - report stage
- committee reports back to the House that introduced it
- vote is done on suggested amendments
governmental process: 6 - 3rd reading
- final vote
- bill is sent to the other house & process is repeated
governmental process: 7 - royal assent
- monarch (King) will sign the bill to introduce act
governmental process: 8 - commencement order
- issued by relevant government department bill
- specifies date it comes into effect
bill
draft of law
legislation (statute)
act of parliament
judicial process: role of judges
- judges within senior courts make laws through:
- judicial precedent
- statutory interpretation
judicial process: judicial precedent
- doctrine of Judicial precedent: past decisions from higher courts create laws for future courts to follow where the material facts are the same
- known as ‘stare decisis’
judicial process: common law
- body of law created by judicial precedent
- set of legal rules that is made up of past judicial decisions
judicial process: what precedent needs
- established hierarchy of courts: lower courts are bound to follow precedent of higher courts
- valid law reports
judicial process: influence on law
- Doctrine of binding precedent creates consistency
- Shaw v DPP (2012) was followed in Knuller v DPP (1973)
- HOL decision Shaw that the offence of conspiracy to corrupt public moral existed
- senior courts can overrule precedent to keep pace with changing social attitudes or technological advancements
judicial process: ways judicial precedent is made
- distinguishing: judge find the fact in the present case different enough from past cases
- overruling: where a higher court states that an earlier decision is wrong
judicial process: overruling R v R (1992)
- husband was convicted attempted rape on his wife
- appealed on grounds that a centuries old precedent that a husband couldn’t be convicted due to:
- marriage contract gives wife’s ’irrevocable consent’
- COA overruled it due to the ground that the idea of irrevocable consent wasn’t acceptable in today’s society
judicial process: statutory interpretation
- judges must interpret words in Acts of Parliament
- ## can make new law about meaning of certain words by overruling existing precedent
judicial process: literal rule
judges must give the word/ phrase its natural, ordinary or dictionary meaning even if this appears to be contrary to intentions of Parliament
judicial process: literal rule
Whiteley v Chappell (1868)
- law made it an offence to impersonate any person entitled to vote
- defendant impersonated a dead person
- defendant found not guilty as the judge interpreted words ‘entitled’ literally
judicial process: golden rule
where a literal interpretation of word lead to an absurd result, court may modify its meaning
judicial process: golden rule
Adler v George (1964)
- an offence to obstruct a member of the armed forces in the vicinity of a prohibited place
- defendant was found guilty and the conviction upheld
- absurd if a person wasn’t held liable if they were actually in the prohibited place
judicial process: mischief rule
- allows the judge to understand intention of Parliament when it passes an act
- contextual method of interpreting statutes where court looks for the wrong/ mischief that the statute was intended to put right
judicial process: mischief rule
Smith v Hughes (1960)
- prostitutes stood on a balcony of a house trying to get customers
- defendants convicted of solicitation under Street Offences Act 1959
- tried to argue they weren’t on the streets but court upheld the conviction
