Legal system - 1.3 Legal personnel Flashcards

Question

what is the Role of High court Judges?

Answer 1

- Needs to be qualified as a barrister or solicitor. And to gain an experience in law for 7 years or to be a circuit judge for two years. - the vast majority of HCH are appointed to serve full time from barristers, who have been in practice for 20 or 30 years.

Answer 2

- All legal executives are members. - CILEX publishes a code of conduct, regulation. Cilex regulation board. - Investigates complaints, summary of put to the professional conduct panel. - The panel decides if misconduct, reprimand. Excludes a person from membership, pay a fine.

Answer 3

- office for legal complaints,set up legal services Act 2007. - Provides a free service, investigate individual regulatory body - Three body.

Answer 4

- (They are officially appointed by the king) this is for KBD, chancery, family division. - Judges in kbd will hear a high value civil claims of contract and tort. And will hear serious criminal cases such as muder in cc court.

Answer 5

- will hear a high value commercial claims and cases of liquidation of the companies and partnership disputes.

Answer 6

- Judges in family division will hear claim relating disputes of property and financial matters of married and unmarried partners and child of relationship. - for all three, judges of high court will sit with lord justices.

Answer 7

- Needs to be solicitor or barrister who has right of audience of 19 years. - They should serve part time as a recorder in criminal cases, or full time district judges. - As a recorder, they will hear less serious civil cases in county court. And less serious criminal cases in crown court. - in county court, they will hear wide range of tort and contract claims, claims relating to possums of land and property disputes and some family work. - In crown court, they will take charge of criminal trials, hearing more serious cases as they gain seniority, and sentence offenders who have pleaded guilty.

Answer 8

- DJ is full time. - Must be qualified as barrister or solicitor, and experience of law for 5 years or be a deputy DJ. - Vast majority of DJ are former solicitor. - Cilex fellow are eligible to be appointed as deputy DJ, and is under the tribunals, courts and enforcement act (2007). - In county court and small claims court, they will hear low value civil claims of tort and contract.

Answer 9

- Judges must not hear it try any case in which they have an interest in the issues involved. This was confirmed by Pinochet case. - Re Pinochet: claims was made to extradite (sent back) Pinochet, back to chile. The lords orders that he could be extradited. Lord hoffman, director of amnesty international who gathered evidence. Law lords decided that their original decision could not stand the panel. And to be seen as completely unbiased — The law must be fair and look fair.

Answer 10

- hearing in the divisional court. - Decisions of government ministers can be challenged by a person who has “standing”. - Affected by the decision. - Judges can challenge gov decisions.

Answer 11

- High court declared that the home secretary’s power to refuse to provide assistance to asylum seekers, was unlawful. - Court of appeal suggests how the act could be made compatible with human rights. Human right: Human rights act 1988 — Judges can check if our law is compatible with human rights.

Answer 12

- Anti terrorism Act 2001. - House of lords declared incompatible with ECHR. - Act allowed foreign nationals detained indefinitely without trial — if suspected of terrorism. - No discrimination.

Answer 13

- Judges not involved in law making. - Full time judges are not allowed to be MP. - recorders can be MP. - Judges were in the house of lords appellate committee of the house of lords. - Creation of supreme court in 2009 was to separate the judiciary from the legislature. - Judges of the supreme court are not allowed to be lords. Their salaries are independent from parliament. - Parliament can charge judicial retirement age.

Answer 14

- they can make decisions that they may displease the gov, without the threat of dismissal. - CRA 2005 S3: LC must uphold the independence of the judiciary. - They and the gov, must not try to influence judicial decisions. — problems of the issue of Rwanda and whether it was “safe”.

Answer 15

- Judges must be able to perform their duties without fear of repercussion. - Cannot be prosecuted in their capacity as a judge (all levels). This includes being immune to civil cases e.g defamation.

Answer 16

- Judges wrongly ordered a persons detention. - Person launched a claim for false imprisonment. - The court of Appeal decided. Although unlawful, the judge had acted in good faith.

Answer 17

- role was changed. - Used to be the head of the judiciary. - The lord chancellor is an MP, is a member of the legislature and member of the cabinet. And is part of excecutive. - This changed due to constitutional reform act 2005.

Answer 18

- The legislature, this is law making arm of the state and in the english system this is parliament. - The executive or the body administering the law. In british political system this is the government — the cabinet. - The judiciary, judges who apply the law. - between the executive and the legislature: ministers forming the government also sit in the parliament. You must be in parliament to be in the cabinet, Lord cameron. - The exception of the lord chancellor, very little overlap between judiciary and other two arms. And SC court was established. CRA 2005, 2009 for House of common.

Answer 19

- Tenure: Protection from dismissal in a job. - Superior level judges cannot be dismissed by the gov. they can be only be dismissed by the monarch following a petition presented by both house of parliament. - Inferior judges: they don’t have tenure, below the high court. Can get rid of them. The lord chancellor with permission of lady chief justice — then they can be dismissed. Grounds = incapacity of behaviour. e.g Hartman “the horrible” Resigned under pressure in 1988, rudeness, out of touch — assaulted his driver.

Answer 20

- District judges can sit on their own and decide if the D is guilty or not guilty. sand the sentence for D if they plead guilty it is found guilty. - In CC court, judge will sit with jury where D pleads not Guilty to either way of indictable offence. And will decide legal issues in the case and direct the jury on the relevant law. Decides the sentence, when D pleads guilty or is found guilty by jury. Takes account any legal submission on behalf of D and considers any reports. - In the mags court, they will sit alone to hear summary and either way criminal trial and impose sentences on offenders of those crimes. - convicted D can appeal to the court of appeal (civil division) against the sentence and/or the conviction. Three judges will the legal arguments from the defence and prosecution. And they can confirm the original decision and/or sentence, vary the sentence or find D not guilty. If it is their decision they can order a retrial. - Further appeal against the decision of COA. It is taken to SC court, only if leave is granted, and an issue of public importance. 5 justices will hear legal arguments from Defence and prosecution. No evidence heard. The court agrees it overrule the decision of COA. And not make a decision of sentence.

Answer 21

- The theory was put forward my Montesquieu in 18 century. - Only way to safeguard liberty is keeping these functions separate.

Answer 22

- the general role of an judge is to resolve disputes in a fair, unbiased way, applying the law to each cases before them. - Civil courts of first instance (CC + HC) judge will sit alone - deal with all aspects. - Hear evidence from all the witnesses. -Listen to legal arguments. - Look at any relevant case papers. - Decide the facts, how the law applies to those facts, and make the decision as to who has won the case. (also known as who is liable) - in a contract and tort case, decide the amount of damages payable or other remedy requested such as specific performance of a contract. - Decides who should bear the legal costs of the case. - Appeal court judges don’t hear evidence from witnesses. And hear arguments on legal point in case. And decide if the decision made at the trial should stand or appeal. - In COA (civil division) an appeal may be heard against the finding of liability or about the remedy awarded, e.g the amount of money awarded as damages. The court can either allow or dismiss The appeal or vary the amount of damage. - A case can only be appealed to the SC if there is an important point of law involved it an issue of general public importance. Five justices will normally sit to hear the appeal. Often appeals involves complicated areas of law and how legislation should be interpreted. Any decision of SC court on a point of law becomes a precedent for all lower courts to follow.

Answer 23

- used in the legal system for over 1,000 years. - Originally provided local knowledge and were essentially witnesses. - By the 15 century they become the deciders of the fact. - They decided if a defendant is innocent or guilty based on the evidence given to them. Not the sentence.

Answer 24

- Bushells : Jurors refused to convict quaker. The judge disagreed. - Judge ordered the jurors resume without food or drinks. - Committed them to prison. — Appeal court. - ordered the release jurors, could not be punished for their verdict. - R v mckenna : judge threatened the jurors — they had 10 mins to return a verdict. - The jury then returned a verdict but was quashed due to judges interference.

Answer 25

- Crown court - where juries are used. - 2% - where D i’d guilty/not guilty in jury trials. - 94% - are dealt in mags court. - 2/3% - D will plead guilty. - 12 members are jury.

Answer 26

- basic qualification: Aged between 18-75, registered as parliamentary or local government elector. resident uk, channel island or isle of man for 5 years or 13 birthday. - Criminal Justicr and court act 2015. Electoral register. - Disqualification: Life imprisonment, detention for his majesty pleasure, imprisonment for public protection or detention for public protection, extended sentence, a term of imprisonment for five years or for more. - Mentally disordered persons: Suffer mental illness, person who is under guardianship under section 7 of mental health act 1983 or determined by judge to be incapable of administering his/her property and affairs. Resident in hospital. - Excused: Full time members of armed forces absence from jury service. if officer certifies absence from duty. - discretionary: being too ill, problems making it difficult. mother with a small baby. most likely to deter.

Answer 27

- Criminal justice act 2003 - now they can. - legally well qualified juror influencing the rest of the jury.

Answer 28

- does not understand english adequately. - some disability, who is blind unable to see photographs. - those who are deaf and need a sign - Language interpreter cannot sit as jurors, does not allow 13 person.

Answer 29

- each CC court there is an official who is responsible for summoning enough jurors in each two - Week period. - names to be selected at random. The electoral registers for the area which is computer selection. - 2/3% - D will plead guilty. - 12 members are jury. - those summoned must notify the court if there is any reason why they should not or cannot attend. - expected to attend for two weeks. Vetting goes on for more than two weeks, they have to stay. - The list of potential jurors prosecuted and the defence have the right to see.

Answer 30

- R v sheffield: D was a police officer, Defence sought permission to vet the jury panel for convictions. Judge gave permission, COA and vetting is unconstitutional. - R v mason: Widespread use of unauthorised vetting of criminal records, COA approved. - Police were only doing their normal duty of preventing crime.

Answer 31

- check on political affiliations - ABC trial two journalist soldier charged with collecting secrete information. - the jury had been vetted for loyalty. - the trial was stopped.

Answer 32

- Vetting should only be used in exceptional cases. -national security. - terrorist cases. - The attorney generals permission.

Answer 33

- divided into groups of 15, select 12 juries.

Answer 34

- Before the jury is sworn in, both prosecution and defence challenge one of more. To the array: Juries act 1974, challenge the whole jury, chosen in an unrepresentative way. R v ford: if jury was chosen in random manner, it could not be challenged simply because it was not multi racial. For cause: challenging individual juror. - Valid reasons, e.g juror disqualified. - if the juror knows or is related to the witness or D. - There is a risk that any subsequent conviction could be quashed. - Prosecution rights to stand by jurors: the juror who has been stood put to the end of the list of. - Does not have to give a reason.

Answer 35

- only in the CC court. - where the D pleads not guilty. split function: - the judges decides point of law. - Jury decides the facts. - End of the case, judge has power to direct the jury to acquit, if prosecution evidence has not made out a case, called directed acquittal. - Jury retires to a private room in secrete. - must try to come to a unanimous verdict (everyone). - Majority verdicts: - After two hours judge can direct that he can now accept a majority verdict allowed since 1967. - Where there is a full verdict can be 10-2 or 11:1.

Answer 36

- Public confidence in the legal system: Fundamentals of a democratic society — Mayna cata. - Liberty against the state. - Devin said “lamp that shows that freedom”. - Jury equality: Not legal expert, not bound precedent - By decides cases on “fairness”— avoid poor precedents. - Pontings case (1984): Civil servant was charged under official secrets act 1911. - Had leaked information sinking of the Brlgrano to an MP. - The jury refused to convict even though the judge ruled there was no defence. - If there are only nine jurors the verdict must be unanimous. - Majority verdict introduced because the jury were going to be “nobbed”,bribed,intimidated by associates of D. - It was thought that majority decision would result in more conviction. - In a majority, the foreman must announce the numbers, the juries act 1974 aimed at making sure the jury has come to a legal majority 20 per cent of convictions of majority verdict. secrecy of the jury room: - The jury to bring in verdicts that may be unpopular with the public. - The freedom to ignore the strict letter of the law — avoid thr tyranny of the majority. - Impartiality: - Not connected to anyone. - Random selection. - Cross - section of society. - the jurors will have different prejudices. - A jury not case — hardened sits for only two weeks.

Answer 37

- Perverse decisions — counter equality point: - pointing — example again. - Perverse decision: Ignores the evidence, wrong decision. - R v randle and pottle (1991): Charged with helping a spy to escape from prison flee to russia — Y13. Prosecution did not occur until 25 years after, the jury acquitted them, over time lapse. - R v mirza (2004) : D, a pakistani interpreter. Jury sent notes asking why he needed an interpreter, a ‘theory’ interpreter was a “ploy”. - R v connor and rollock (2004): many jurors thought it was one or other of the d who had committed the stabbing. They convicted both to “teach them a lesson”. - R v young (1995) : D was charged with the murder. Jury stay in a hotel, four of the jurors held a seance using ohio’s board to try to contact the victim. Returned a guilty verdict. became known, COA quashed the conviction felt able to inquire into what happened. Had occurred in a hotel, not part of the jury room. Sound exception where extraneous material - evidence not permitted. - R v karakaya (2005): - d was accused of rape, juror internet search at home and brought into the jury room. convicted, but conviction was quashed because of the outside information during its deliberations. - Jurors and the internet: - Judges direct jurors not to look at the internet. - 2010, report 12 per cent of jurors admitted they had. - CJ and courts act criminal offence for a juror to search the internet, two years imprisonment. - secrecy: - no inquiry into the verdict. - Cj and courts act 2015 criminal offence to intentionally disclose anything that happens in the jury room. - Disclose is allowed in situation ms where it is in the interests of justice. - courts act 2015 gives power to the judge to ask jurors to hand in their phones. - Secrecy — Again a reverse: - no reasons have to be given, no way of knowing if the jury understood the case. - came to the decision for the right reasons. - R v Mirza, House of lords ruled that it could not inquire into the decision in a jury room. - Sander v united kindom (2000): Jurors had written a note to the judge concerns over the facts that other jurors had been making openly racist remarks and jokes. - ECHR held the judge should have discharged the jury.