THE SUPREME COURT/HOL- Practise Statement General knowledge

Question 1

In what year did the Lord Chancellor issue the Practise Statement?

Answer 1

1966

Question 2

What case initiated the creation of the PS made by the Lord Chancellor in 1966?

Answer 2

London Street Tramways V London County Council 1898

Question 3

What was the rule made in 1898 which came to pass because of the London Street Tramways V London County Council 1898

Answer 3

That all decisions in the HOL were bound by each other in the interest of consistency

Question 4

before 1966, what were the only 2 ways that a decision made by the HOL could be overruled?

Answer 4

• ‘Per Incuriam’ a decision made in error without considering the effect of relevant statute
• an Act of Parliament had to be passed which took years

Question 5

How many times has PS been used since its creation in 1966?

Answer 5

30 times

Question 6

When can the HOL use the PS?

Answer 6

‘when it appears right to do so’

Question 7

Why was the PS introduced?

Answer 7

HOL felt that they could not alter decisions to meet changing social conditions and opinions

Question 8

In what case (when) was there a change in precedent through an Act of Parliament?

Answer 8

DPP V Smith 1961

Question 9

What did the case of DPP V Smith 1961 involve?

Answer 9

The issue of whether or not the defendant could be guilty even if they had not intended to cause death or serious injury, nor even realised that their actions might have that effect

Question 10

When and under what power did Parliament change the law regarding the case of DPP V Smith 1961?

Answer 10

Criminal Justice Act 1967

Question 11

What was the main problem with the PS ?

Answer 11

the guidance of ‘when it appears right to do so’ is very general and vague, giving little guidance as to when the HOL might overrule a decision

Question 12

When did the Supreme Court replace the HOL?

Answer 12

2009

Question 13

Under what power was the Practice Statement transferred to the Supreme Court in 2009?

Answer 13

s.40 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005

Question 14

What case did the Supreme Court acknowledge the continuation of the PS?

Answer 14

Austin V London Borough of Southwark 2010

Question 15

What did the case of Austin V Borough of Southwark 2010 involve/describe it?

• what was it about
• did they depart from earlier decision

Answer 15

• about tenancy of law

- Did not depart from earlier deacons as they believed that certainty in tenancy law was more important