Legal Systems of England and Wales

Question 1

Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949

Answer 1

Speaker of House of Commons invoke.
Lords and Commons unable to come to agreement, Commons overrulling.

Question 2

Rule of law

Answer 2

Lord Bingham
Law must be clear and predictable.
Exercise of discretion should be subordinate to exercise of law.
All equal before the law.
States should should provide essential safety net for settlement of matters which private properties and individuals are unable to resolve.
State should adhere to international and national obligations.

Question 3

Consolidation

Answer 3

One statute re-enacts law previously contained in several different statutes. Presumption that it does not materially change earlier legislation.

Question 4

Codification

Answer 4

All law on same topic, common law, custom, statutes brought into new statute. Changes pre-existing law.

Question 5

Doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty

Answer 5

UK/international courts have no power to declare invalid. UK judges - declarations of incompatibility.
Conflict - statute prevails.
Parliament cannot bind successors.

Question 6

Intrinsic aids

Answer 6

The use of the statute itself.

Question 7

Extrinsic aids

Answer 7

Outside statute itself. E.g. dictionary.
Pepper v Hart [1993] -
Statute is ambiguous or literal meaning leads to absurdity and material consists of clear statements by minister or promoter of bill.

Question 8

Purposive approach

Answer 8

Judge looks at reasons why, even if departing from ordinary meaning.

Question 9

The golden rule

Answer 9

2 meanings - should be given ordinary meaning as far as possible but only to extent they do not produce absurd/obnoxious result.
Adler v George [1964] -
“in the vicinity of any prohibited place”

Question 10

The mischief rule

Answer 10

Ascertain legislator’s intention.
Corkey v Carpenter [1951] -
‘carriage’ to include bicycle.

Question 11

The literal rule

Answer 11

Plain, ordinary, literal meaning.

Question 12

Noscitur a sociis

Answer 12

Recognition of associated words.
E.g. Factories Act 1961 -
all ‘floors, steps, stairs, passageways and gangways’ kept free from obstruction.
Pengelly v Bell Co Ltd [1964] - not floor exclusively for storage - does not indicate passage.

Question 13

Eiusdem genreris

Answer 13

Of same kind of nature.
If general word follows 2 or more specific words - general word only apply to items of same type as specific words.
Wood v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [1986] -
‘… or other offensive weapon’.

Question 14

Expressio unius est exclusion alterius

Answer 14

Expressing one thing excludes another.
One or more specific things may exclude others of same type. Not followed by general words.
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p Crew [1982] - excludes father, mentions mother only.

Question 15

The Court of Appeal and precedent

Answer 15

Bound by the Supreme Court and binds courts below.
Young v Bristol Aeroplane [1944] -
departs from previous decision -
Conflicts with another one from it.
Implicitly overruled by Supreme Court.
Made incuriam - through carelessness.