Describe Jury Trial within the English legal system. How effective is Trial by jury? consider any alternatives and suggest improvements.

Describe Jury Trial within the English legal system. How effective is Trial by jury? consider any alternatives and suggest improvements. Part 1- Describe Jury Trial within the English Legal system A Trial by Jury is one of the oldest traditions, and is seen as a cornerstone in the English Legal System as it developed from the Anglo-Saxon judicial custom. In the English legal system it is seem as such a major feature because it allows people to be judged by their peers rather than by judges whom the majority of people consider to be middle class and middle minded. Opportunities for bias are also eliminated as it has been proven to be a system that works well and that is respected by the majority of people in society. Surprisingly England stands almost alone in the fact that it uses juries apart from France who are the only other country in Europe that use juries. Still in France juries are only used in the most serious of cases. To sit on a jury the person must be aged between 18 and 70 (previously 65 until Justice Act 1988, section 119) and also to become eligible to vote the person must be registered on the electoral register under the Juries Act 1974. Also the person must have been a resident of the UK, Channel Islands or the Isle of Man for at least 5 years. However there are further requirements that may rule certain people out from sitting on a jury these are certain

  • Word count: 1130
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Is any act of statutory interpretation a arbitrary choice by a judge?

In what way can the different 'rules' of statutory interpretation be understood as forming a coherent process of interpretation, or is any act of statutory interpretation an arbitrary choice by a judge? It has been said that there are three 'rules' of statutory interpretation - the literal, the golden, and the mischief rule. It is clear that contrary to the label of 'rules' widely given to them, they are more sensibility regarded as approaches. The moot point has rather been on the way judges utilize these three approaches. Do they give each one equal consideration in a religious way, or do they simply use them as post hoc justification to their decisions? In looking for an answer to the question of how judges interpret statutes, history would always prove to be an appropriate source to start with. The English legal history starts with the defeat of the Saxon king by Norman William the Conqueror in 1066. At that point, law, if any, was transmitted in the form of local customs, informal and merely used for the practical end of enforcing compensation in order to preventing bloodshed. It is largely agreed by historians that William left the laws alone. Nevertheless, gradually local customs gave way to one unified body of laws. In a contest for power with the church's courts and the attempt to centralize power, King Henry II, great-grandson of William, soon after his accession

  • Word count: 1798
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

The Bail Act 1976 gives a general right to bail, no matter how serious the offence. the 2003 criminal justice act amended this which restricted rights to adults who tested positive for class a drugs and refuse to be assessed or refused to participate in t

Bail assignment 2.11 a)The meaning of bail means a suspect/defendant is given liberty- the chance to go back to their ordinary lives, until the next stage of their case. The Bail Act 1976 gives a general right to bail, no matter how serious the offence. the 2003 criminal justice act amended this which restricted rights to adults who tested positive for class a drugs and refuse to be assessed or refused to participate in treatment. In the 1976 bail act if the defendant released on bail doesn't surrender to custody , they are automatically guilty of an offence. However the magistrates can refuse bail where there are substantial grounds to believe the defendant will: not surrender to bail, commit an offence, interfere with witnesses. when the court is deciding whether of not to grant bail they will consider certain factors such as the nature and seriousness of the offence. The courts are governed by the provisions found in the bail act 1976 and there is a presumptive right to bail under section 4 and it can only be refused on conditions set out in the act. but the underlying doctrine is clear -unnecessary resort to custody is legally wrong as it is morally offensive. However there are three principles which should guide decision makers in their treatment of defendants waiting trial. these are that unconvinced persons should be presumed to be innocent and treated accordingly.

  • Word count: 1580
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Law and Fault. The fundamental principle of English law is that there is no liability without fault. In this case, there are many definitions of fault; it is an expression that may be used to describe legal responsibility for a wrongful act.

Law & Fault The fundamental principle of English law is that there is no liability without fault. In this case, there are many definitions of fault; it is an expression that may be used to describe legal 'responsibility' for a wrongful act. This is illustrated in criminal law, as for the defendant to be held liable for an offence the prosecution must prove the defendant acquired both, actus reus and mens rea for that offence. The actus reus refers to the physical element of an offence, it is the positive voluntary act or omission which causes a crime. Mens rea refers to the mental element of an offence which is the blameworthy state of mind (usually subjective recklessness or intention) that is required by the courts at the time the offence is committed. In this case, unless the prosecution can prove mens rea is present at the time the defendant commits the act, he will not be liable as there is no fault for the crime. The idea is not whether or not the act itself was committed, but whether the defendant intended it. For instance, for a defendant to be charged with assault under s.39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the defendant must have the intention or be subjective enough to cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force. Intention meaning that they desired the outcome (they chose to bring about the prohibited circumstances) as illustrated in Mohan, or that

  • Word count: 1426
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Balancing Competing Interests

Balancing Competing Interests Everybody would want to be sure that their interests are protected by the law and that the law achieves this through various sets of rules. Inevitably the interests of one individual and the interest of the majority may sometimes fall into a conflict. The law needs to ensure courts and tribunals that if conflicts of interest arise there is a means of settling them in a way that tries to balance the opposing views as fairly as possible. The sociological school of jurisprudence see law as a social phenomenon that is best discussed in terms of functions, roles, classes and so on rather than in such terms as powers, rights and duties. Rudolf von Jhering saw laws as a means of ordering a society in which there are many competing interests. All interests need to be satisfied. The law therefore acts as mediator assessing the value of each of these interests and determining the proper balance between them. Roscoe Pound suggested that the 'claims, demands or desires' seeking legal recognition could be classified as individual's interests such as personality or social interests such as safety, health. He insisted that competing interests would only be balanced if they were interests on the same plane. The courts don't follow Roscoe Pound's idea that you can only balance interests of the same kind a way in which you can consider how effectively the law

  • Word count: 894
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

What are the alternative methods of dispute resolution

What are the alternative methods of dispute resolution? Discuss each. Alternative methods of dispute resolution (ADR) are methods of resolving a dispute without resorting to using the courts. The fundamental principles of Alternative Dispute Resolutions are Negotiation, Tribunals, Conciliation, Arbitration and Mediation. Many of these approaches include the use of a neutral individual such as a mediator who can assist disputing parties in resolving their disagreements. The use of these methods helps in bringing justice to all people concerned with civil matters. The most obvious and most cost effective way of resolving disputes is by negotiation. It is where the two parties get together and discuss the points of the matter. Also this way of solving disputes means that the parties involved may remain on talking grounds, which usually benefits everyone concerned. If the matter cannot be solved through informal negotiating then the parties involved can involve solicitors to negotiate a settlement for them. This, however, does mean there will be a cost element but it could eliminate the amount of time taken up, which is what ADR aims for. Although negotiating is simple, its practicality can be questioned, as some matters may take years to resolve and can cost a lot. This is where the other forms of ADR and the application of the new Civil Procedure Rules come in. They all aim at

  • Word count: 1252
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

'Justice requires that prosecutions should be undertaken by a body which is fully independent and impartial'. To what extent does the CPS fulfil this role?

'Justice requires that prosecutions should be undertaken by a body which is fully independent and impartial'. To what extent does the CPS fulfil this role? Until 1986, criminal prosecutions were officially brought by private citizens rather than the state: in practice, however, most prosecutions were brought by the police, though technically they were prosecuting as private citizens. This issue had been brought to ahead in 1970, when the law reform group, JUSTICE, criticised the role of the police in the prosecution process. It argued that it was not in the interests of justice for the same body to be responsible for the two very different functions of investigation and prosecuting. This dual role prevented the prosecution from being independent and impartial: the police had become concerned with winning or losing, when the aim of the prosecution should be to discovery the truth. As a result, there was a real danger of the police intentionally withholding from the defence evidence that might make a conviction less likely. The report also highlighted the fact that public policy and the circumstances of the individual were relevant considerations in the decision to prosecute, and that the English legal system was unique in Europe in allowing the whole process, from interrogation to prosecution, to be effectively under the control of the police - who were not trained as

  • Word count: 1585
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

There are several differences between a negotiated out of court settlement and a civil action for damages.

Essay 2: AQA January 2002 a) There are several differences between a negotiated out of court settlement and a civil action for damages. When a dispute arises between two groups - the easiest way to resolve it is by negotiation. This involves meetings until an agreement is reached. However the potential claimant (or plaintiff) may decide to begin legal proceedings rather than negotiate, or if an agreement cannot be reached. Obviously, with the millions of summons served everyday and all the delays that occur during litigation - a final decision can take a long time. Negotiation is often much quicker as the court need not be involved and delays do not occur if both parties want to resolve the dispute with minimum hassle and cost. Civil action is expensive from the outset, with a claims form itself costing money. Each side must take into account the court fees and of course lawyer's fees they may have to pay if they lose. Negotiation on the other hand does not inevitably cost anything - merely a stamp if the discussions are being done by post, or the price of hiring a room for debates between the two sides to take place. Another difference between the two is that negotiation is informal and as a result user friendly because no court is involved and thus both sides can use simple, colloquial language. This also speeds up the process. Sometimes, during legal action

  • Word count: 1286
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Principles on which sentencing decisions are based

Sentencing: Principles on which sentencing decisions are based have to be considered in the light of the available penalties which a criminal court may impose on a defendant. Whatever principles there are will be reflected in the types of sentence available and the way in which the courts choose between alternative penalties. The valuable penalties are first of all determined by the offence for which the defendant has been convicted: many minor offences for example will be punishable only by way of fine. In addition if the matter is disposed of in the Magistrates' Court or Youth Court (for juveniles) there are additional restrictions on the powers of sentence. Generally no custodial term may exceed six months (12 months exceptionally where more than one offence is involved) nor may any fine exceed five thousand pounds. However, in these cases if the offence is 'triable either way' the magistrates may commit the offender to the Crown Court for sentence only where the Crown Court has powers to impose any sentence permitted by the offence (although in the case of juveniles, except in very restricted cases, any custodial term must not exceed one year). The courts broadly have a choice between a discharge (conditional or absolute), fine, community sentence (there are six type of community sentence: probation order, community service order, combination order, curfew order,

  • Word count: 2260
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Jury decision making: Discuss the effectiveness of jury decision making.

JURY DECISION MAKING: DISCUSS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF JURY DECISION MAKING The processes by which a jury in a criminal trail decide whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty can be affected by many case factors. Many of which have been psychologically researched, and proven to have an effect on the verdict given. The main factors that may affect the verdict given by the jury are; exposure to pre-trial publicity about the case, the use of eyewitnesses and the characteristics of the defendant, including the defendants race, attractiveness and accent. These case factors can sometimes, and sometimes not have an effect of the verdict given by jurors. Pre-trial publicity can have a major effect on the decision made by jurors. This can happen before and also can carry on during the trial. Exposure to details portrayed in the media can lead the juror to form biased decisions based on biased or even incorrect media details or they can form their own personal opinions about the case and/or the defendant. An example of this s the trial of footballer Lee Bowyer who was on trial for a racist attack. The media had a huge effect on this trail to the extent that it had to be dropped due to certain articles in newspapers which could have affected the jury's decision. The effect this has on juries has been researched by Fein et al (1997) the found that mock jurors were more likely to

  • Word count: 1245
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay