Different to the vast majority of the European Countries the legal system in the United Kingdom is not based on a constitution. English law is uncodified, this means that the laws of certain areas of law are not systematically bundled into one specific code.
Basically, the English law is composed of three elements: directly enforceable EU law, common law and legislation created through Parliament whereas the latter is the highest form of UK law. Under British Constitutional Law the Parliament is sovereign. Following the traditional interpretation of Parliament Sovereignty "it has the power to make any statutes on any subject matter, and British courts are bound to enforce that laws" without questioning their validity. Contrary to countries with a written constitution, UK courts do not have the power to overrule statutes that appear to be unconstitutional.
Characteristically, judges have a significant role within the English legal system. Unlike the, for example, German legal system judges in the United Kingdom do not only decide on cases according to existing laws but also are able to create and influence laws. Due to the unique role of judges in the English court system the Doctrine of Precedent and Statutory Interpretation were manifested as principles of the national court system.
Consequently, this paper will discuss the following statement in the light of the Doctrine of Precedent, the rules of Statutory Interpretation and whether judges should be creating new law. "It is not for the judge to invent fancied ambiguities as an excuse for failing to give effect to its [legislation] plain meaning because they themselves consider that the consequences of doing so would be inexpedient, or even unjust or immoral."
Table of Contents
Part 1
1 Introduction
2 The Quote's Background
3 The Doctrine of Precedent
4 The Interpretation of Statutes
5 Should judges create new law?
Part 2
1 Introduction
2 Tare v David
3 Sally v David
4 Lin v David
5 Raphael v David
6 Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This coursework aims to analyze fundamental principles of the English legal system, specifically the Doctrine of Precedent and Statutory Interpretation, while applying these concepts to practical contract law scenarios. The research focuses on the tension between strict legal interpretation and the potential necessity for judicial law-making.
- The role of judges in the English legal system.
- Mechanisms and application of the Doctrine of Precedent.
- Rules of Statutory Interpretation, including the literal rule.
- Formation of legally binding contracts (offer, acceptance, and consideration).
- Evaluation of enforceable legal claims in private disputes.
Excerpt from the book
3 The Doctrine of Precedent
A further particularity of the English legal system is the Doctrine of binding Precedent, also known as stare decisis. The Doctrine of Precedent is a fundamental reason for the importance of case law within the English legal system (Jones 2015, p. 6). English judges, as opposed to other European countries, do not only consider previous decisions in cases with comparable facts but are bound to apply the jurisdiction of earlier cases if they "were heard in in a court of superior [...] and sometimes [...] equal status" (Jones 2015, p. 6). The Doctrine of Precedent is a key concept of the English legal system giving judges the opportunity to influence legislation or even to create new law.
According to the principle of stare decisis, until the Practice Statement 1966 the House of Lords was bound to all of its previous decision even if this created "injustice [and] unduly restricts the proper development of the law" (London Tramways Co. v London County Council [1898] AC 375). By this Statement "[their Lordships] propose therefore, to modify their present practice and, while treating former decisions of this house as normally binding, to depart from a previous decision when it appears right to do so (Practice Statement HL Judicial Precedent. [1966] 1 WLR 1234 ). The Practice Statement authorises the supreme court (formerly the House of Lords) to depart from previous decisions whereas precedents are still binding for lower courts.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter provides an overview of the English legal system, highlighting its uncodified nature and the sovereign power of Parliament.
2 The Quote's Background: This section contextualizes a judicial quote regarding the literal rule and the restraint judges should exercise when interpreting statutes.
3 The Doctrine of Precedent: This chapter explores the principle of stare decisis and how the 1966 Practice Statement granted the House of Lords flexibility to depart from past decisions.
4 The Interpretation of Statutes: This chapter examines the necessity of judicial interpretation and the contrast between the literal and purposive approaches.
5 Should judges create new law?: This chapter debates the extent of the legislative function of judges and the inherent tension between strict law application and justice.
1 Introduction: The second part introduces contract law basics, defining essential requirements like offer, acceptance, and consideration.
2 Tare v David: This case study analyzes an advertisement as an invitation to treat and concludes that no enforceable contract was formed due to the lack of a valid offer.
3 Sally v David: This chapter discusses communication of an offer via post and why an offer that never reaches the offeree cannot result in a binding contract.
4 Lin v David: This section evaluates a scenario where an offer was accepted, making the contract binding despite a later attempted withdrawal by the offeree.
5 Raphael v David: This analysis focuses on family agreements and whether an offer made under emotional stress carries the necessary legal intention for a contract.
6 Conclusion: The final chapter summarizes the findings regarding the enforceability of claims in the discussed scenarios.
Keywords
English legal system, Doctrine of Precedent, Statutory Interpretation, Parliament, Contract Law, Stare decisis, Literal rule, Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, Judicial law-making, Legal intent, Binding agreement, Case law, Legislation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
The paper explores the foundational principles of English Law, including how statutes are interpreted and how judicial precedent influences legal outcomes.
What are the central themes discussed?
The central themes are the limits of judicial power, the distinction between literal and purposive interpretation, and the requirements for valid contract formation.
What is the main research question?
The work examines whether judges should take on a legislative role or if they should strictly adhere to the plain meaning of statutes and existing precedents.
Which methodology is applied?
The paper uses legal analysis, referencing key statutes, historical precedents (such as the 1966 Practice Statement), and case studies to evaluate legal claims.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body covers the theoretical framework of the English legal system and provides a practical application of contract law through specific case scenarios (Tare, Sally, Lin, and Raphael).
Which keywords characterize this paper?
Key terms include Doctrine of Precedent, Statutory Interpretation, Stare decisis, Contract law, and Parliamentary Sovereignty.
How is an advertisement viewed under English contract law in this paper?
The paper explains that an advertisement is generally considered an 'invitation to treat' rather than a direct offer, meaning the advertiser is not legally bound to sell to the first respondent.
Why is the case of Airedale NHS Trust v Bland significant?
It is cited as an example where the judiciary had to deal with profound ethical implications, highlighting the complexity of applying law in scenarios involving life and death.
Does the paper conclude that Raphael has a binding contract with David?
The paper concludes that while an offer and acceptance appeared to occur, the validity is questionable due to the domestic context and the influence of emotion, which may negate legal intention.
- Citation du texte
- Karl Luis Neumann (Auteur), 2015, The role of judges in the English legal system. Should judges create a new law?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/427398
