ac1.1: describe processes used for law making Flashcards

1
Q

government processes

A

the majority of laws made in england and wales are made in parliament in a process of consultation, debates and voting. for a new law to be created it must go through certain stages

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

stage 1

A

green paper
sets out ideas for the new law, it’s just a proposal here

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

stage 2

A

white paper
the formal proposal, its known as a bill and is presented in parliament

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

stage 3

A

first reading
the name and aims of the bill are read out in parliament, a vote is taken to see what mp’s think

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

stage 4

A

second reading
there is a debate on the features of the bill, another vote is taken

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

stage 5

A

committee stage
a chosen group of representatives look closely at the bill. they’ll address any issues and suggest appropriate ammendments

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

stage 6

A

report stage
the committee reports back to parliament, mp’s then vote on the amendments made

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

stage 7

A

third reading
after the bill has been debated and amended the mp’s have one final vote

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

stage 8

A

house of commons/lords
stages 3 to 7 are repeated in the other house

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

stage 9

A

royal assent
the monarch signs the bill, this however is only symbolic and they cannot refuse. the bill is now an act of parliament and becomes a law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

judicial processes

A

when a judge makes the law instead of parliament. there are 2 ways this can happen: judicial precedent and statutory interpretation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

judicial precedent

A
  • a law made by judges in the courts, when a judge makes a decision in a case it becomes a law and then must be followed in the future in similar cases
  • this is done to ensure the law is applied consistently
  • lower courts must abide by decisions made in higher courts
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

donoghue v stevenson (1932)

A
  • 2 friends went to a cafe and 1 drank a bottle of ginger beer that had a decomposing snail in it
  • she fell ill and sued the manufacturer
  • the court decided that the manufacturer owed a duty of care (neighbour principle), which founded the modern day law of negligence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

daniels v white (1938)

A
  • the claimant bought a bottle of lemonade that had corrosive metal in it
  • the case of donoghue v stevenson was used when suing for compensation
  • even though the cases were different, it was ruled as sufficiently similar for the purpose of a precedent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

statutory interpretation

A
  • judges in the superior courts like the court of appeal and the supreme court are called upon to interpret words and phrases within a stature
  • there are certain rules that can be used to make the interpretation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

the literal rule

A

the ordinary, disctionary definiton of a word. the judge will start with this

17
Q

whiteley v chappell (1868)

A
  • the defendant was charged with an offence of impersonating any person entitled to vote
  • however the person they attempted to impersonate who was on the voters list was dead
  • the court found them not guilty as a dead person isn’t entitled to vote
18
Q

the golden rule

A

this is used when the literal rule would lead to an absurdity. there may be 2 literal meanings of the same word, they would then choose the word that wouldn’t cause an absurdity. if there is only 1 meaning and it would lead to an absurdity, the meaning is slightly adapted

19
Q

adler v george

A
  • it is an offence to obstruct a member of the armed forces in the vicinity of a prohibited place
  • in this case the perpetrator was in the prohibited place rather than the vicinity
  • the golden rule was applied as it would be absurd for the offender not to be convicted