In general, the criminal law prohibits the doing of harm, but it does not impose a liability for failure to do good. Assess the truth of statement by reference to the situations persons may incur.

In general, the criminal law prohibits the doing of harm, but it does not impose a liability for failure to do good. Assess the truth of statement by reference to the situations persons may incur. For a person to commit a crime, he must have committed some kind of act. There are three ways in which a person can be tested on whether he has committed the crime. The first is that there must be a crime in the first place i.e. murder. The second is that he must have meant to cause it e.g. the result would not have happened if he had not caused it. The third is that he must have a duty of care. In English criminal law, a person is prohibited from causing any kind of harm to another individual. The criminal system does not impose any liability for not doing anything i.e. if a person is drowning in a pool you are not ordered by law to save that person. The only reason you would have to do this is if u were contracted to have that duty. Although in some statues like the Road traffic act (1988) make it an offence to fail to do something. Contractual duty, in R v Pitwood (1902), a signalman was convicted of manslaughter. He was employed by the railway company to look after a level crossing and to make sure that the gate was securely shut when there was a train due. He had left his post and this resulted in a person wondering onto the lines and being killed by an oncoming train. A

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 728
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

judges avoid following precedent

Outline how judges can avoid following precedent and discuss the advantages of their doing so. Judges can avoid following precedent is a number of ways. Distinguishing is one way, where the material facts of the case are different from a previous one and then the judge does not have to follow the earlier one. This is seen in Balfour v Balfour (1919), where the husband made a verbal agreement of giving his wife £30 a month, while he was away in Ceylon. However he stopped the payments and Mrs Balfour started legal action. It reached the Court of Appeal and they held that there was no enforceable agreement, as there was no evidence for a legally binding promise. So when the case of Merritt and Merritt (1970) came along, where Mr Merritt and Mrs Merritt signed an agreement that he would pay her a monthly sum. When the mortgage of the house was paid, Mr Merritt refused to hand over the house. The court accepted the case, as it was more than a domestic agreement as the agreement was signed after they had separated. This decision is from Balfour v Balfour (1919) as there was a signed contract with terms and conditions which both parties had signed. Therefore the judge was allowed to distinguish the case as the facts were different. Judges can also distinguish on a point of law and this is seen in the case R v Holley (2006), which overruled R v Smith (2000). In R v Smith

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 890
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

AS LAW -JUDICIAL PRECEDENT

What is meant by judicial precedents and that judges "are not in liberty to reject them"? (a)Precedent is a law which has been created and is used to make decisions on cases. There are four types of precedent; judicial precedent is when past decisions made by judges are used to create law for future judges to follow. This part of the law is called case law and is used today. If a precedent is bound or binding then this means that a judge must use a previous case and are tied into it and cannot ignore the precedent. If a precedent is persuasive this means that a judge can ignore a past case but can choose to use the decision if they are persuaded that the principles are correct. Finally if you choose to follow a precedent then this is the process of using a past precedent in a future similar case. The Doctrine of Stare Decesis is when cases are treated alike. In order to achieve cases being treated alike, the system was in need of rules. These laws created the source of law known as precedent. In order to create a precedent a judge must make a judgement recorded for future judges. The judgement can be divided into two areas; Ratio Decidendi which is the reason behind the decision. This is part of the judgement that sets out the core of the decision and the reason behind it. It is part of a decision which a future case must be decided by. Secondly a case can be decided on by

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 2295
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Examine the debate as to whether the law should reflect moral values, and discuss issues which show the continuing importance of that debate.

Consider the view that there is a close relationship between law and morality? Examine the debate as to whether the law should reflect moral values, and discuss issues which show the continuing importance of that debate. (30+5 marks) Morals are society's values and beliefs which distinguish from right and wrong. They are constantly changing to reflect society's attitudes ad current social circumstances. Morality can either be prescriptive or normative; which specifies what ought to be done and what is morally acceptable or unacceptable behaviour. This has mainly been influenced by religious beliefs which set the moral code of ones attitudes and beliefs. However, laws are a 'rule of a general norm mandating or guiding conduct,' state from Twining and Miers. Law and moral rules are similar in that they guide social conduct and behaviour, but the main difference is that only rules with legal statuses lead to sanctions and remedies which courts will enforce. Even though law develops from a shared morality, there are differences between the two. Morality develops over a long period of time, whilst the law can be introduced instantly. Morality cannot be changed deliberately; it is formed slowly, and changes according to the will of people and society's opinions and attitudes. For example, in the late 19th century, Oscar Wilde was ruined and imprisoned over his

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1764
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Describe the law making procedure in Parliament.

Describe the law making procedure in parliament. There are three main types of Bills: Public Bills, Private Bills and Hybrid Bills. Public Bills affect the general public. There are two types of public Bills: Government Bills and Private Members Bills. Government Bills are introduced into parliament by Government Ministers whereas Private Members Bills are introduced by backbench MPs or peers. Private Bills affect a particular person or organisation or locality. Hybrid Bills is a cross between a Public Bill and a Private Bill which is introduced by a Government Minister but only affect a particular person, locality or organisation. The first step taken is the first reading. In the first reading the title and main aims of the bill are announced and copies of it are distributed. There is no debate taken at this stage but a verbal vote is taken to decide whether the bill should progress through to the second reading. If the vote is in favour of the Bill a date is then set for the second reading. In the second reading the House debates the whole Bill and is focused on the general principles of it. It is the Minister or other promoter of the Bill who starts the debate. At the end of the debate there is a vote for or against the Bill progressing further. If the Bill progresses to the next stage it is quite likely it will become an Act of Parliament. After the second reading the

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 966
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

There are four main ways, for judges to interpret Parliamentary legislation; they can use the literal rule, golden rule, mischief rule, or the purposive approach.

Lord Scarman stated in Magor and St Mellons v Newport Corporation (1950): "If Parliament says one thing and means another, it is not, under the historic principles of the common law, for the courts to correct it. The general principle must surely be acceptable in our society. We are to be governed not by Parliament's intentions but by Parliament's enactments". (a) With reference to the above source, explain the methods used by judges to interpret Parliamentary legislation. There are four main ways, for judges to interpret Parliamentary legislation; they can use the literal rule, golden rule, mischief rule, or the purposive approach. But on which, depends on the particular judge, as is shown in the text above. Lord Scarman states "If Parliament says one thing and means another, it is not, under the historic principles of the common law, for the courts to correct it" and "We are to be governed not by Parliament's intentions but by Parliament's enactments". This implies that he approves of the literal rule, and strongly disapproves of the others. The literal rule, as it suggests means that the judge will interpret the words of the act literally, even if the result is an unfair or absurd one. As Lord Scarman states in Magor and St Mellons v Newport Corporation [1950] in the text above "We are to be governed not by Parliament's intentions but by Parliament's enactments" this

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 962
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Jury (Criminal & Civil Trials)

Jury Essay (a) Describe the role of Jury in Civil and Criminal trials. Juries have been used in our legal system for over 1000 years since the Magna Carta which recognized the right to trail by "the lawful judgment of his peers." Since 1215 juries became the usual method of trying criminal cases. The independence of the jury was recognized in Bushell's case (1670) when it was established that the judge could not challenge the decision made. A more modern day example demonstrating that judges must respect the independence of the Jury is R v McKenna (1960) where they threatened the jury that if they don't give their verdict within another 10 minutes they will be locked up for the whole night. Juries are used in both Criminal and Civil cases although the use of juries is very small. Juries are used in the Crown Court for criminal trials of indictment, High Court - Queen's Bench Division, County Court and in some cases the Coroners' Courts. Less than 1% of criminal cases are decided on by a jury this is because 97% of cases are dealt by the Magistrates' Court and from the cases that go to the Crown Court, about two out of three defendants plead Guilty. Juries are used in both criminal and civil cases and the law concerning juries is consolidated in the Juries Act 1974. A jury is defined as a body of persons convened by process of law to represent the public at a trial or

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1464
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Discuss the problem of causation in criminal law and what rules have evolved to deal with the problem.

Discuss the problem of causation in criminal law and what rules have evolved to deal with the problem. Causation in its basest terms is simply the remoteness of the act from the crime. This in itself has caused many problems with regard to legal argument and also subsequent loopholes that appeared within the criminal law. It has been established over many years and tried cases, that there must be a clear and unbroken link, or chain of events, that links the defendant to the criminal act. The first and most important point to be considered is "would the act have occurred anyway?" This is often referred to as the "but for" test. In simplest terms this means would the consequence of the defendants act have occurred in the same way at the same time 'but for' the defendants actions. If the answer to this question is 'Yes' then the defendant is not guilty of that crime, R. v. White (1910). However, he may still be guilty of a different crime as with White. One question that has to be considered when looking at the question of causation is 'did the defendant actually commit the act?' If a criminal gets an innocent party to carry out the act of theft, does this exonerate him from prosecution? Surely if there is no actus reus then there is no crime. However, in R. v. Manley (1844) the courts felt otherwise and that a person will be guilty of the act even if an innocent

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1070
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

'In general, the criminal law prohibits the doing of harm but does not impose criminal liability for omission to act' Asses the truth of this statement and the arguments used to justify it.

'In general, the criminal law prohibits the doing of harm but does not impose criminal liability for omission to act' Asses the truth of this statement and the arguments used to justify it. Criminal liability is rarely imposed for true omissions at common law, though there are situations where a non - lawyer would consider that there has been an omission but in law it will be treated as an act and liability will be imposed. There are also situations where the accused has a duty to act, and in these cases there may be liability for a true omission. Well it must be first being decided that whether in law they are dealing with an act or an omission. However, there are three situations where this question arises: continuing acts, supervening faults and euthanasia. The concept of continuing acts was used in Fragan V Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1969) to allow what seemed to be an omission to be treated as an act. The defendant was told by a police officer to park his car close to the kerb; he obeyed the order, but in doing so he accidentally drove his car on the constable's foot. The constable shouted, 'Get off, you are on my foot.' The defendant replied, 'Fuck you, you can wait', and turned off the ignition. He was convinced of assaulting the constable in the execution of his duty. This offence requires an act; an omission is not sufficient. The defendant appealed

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 641
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Judicial Precedent

Judicial precedent The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on the principle of stare decisis, meaning 'to stand by what has been decided'. Under this doctrine, legal decisions made by judges in higher courts set a precedent for judges in equal or lower courts to follow. For the system to operate successfully, three things are required: . a ratio decidendi 2. an accurate record of legal proceedings, otherwise known as law reports 3. a hierarchy of courts Ratio decidendi Ratio decidendi, meaning 'the reason for deciding', is the legal principle laid down in each case. It is given by the judge at the end of a case as the explanation of his/her decision. It is the ratio decidendi which must be followed in future cases of similar fact, this is what is meant by a binding precedent. For example, in R v Howe (1987) the defendant was found to be guilty of murder as his defence of duress which he had pleaded had been found unsubstantial by the House of Lords in a previous case of similar fact. However, judges do not always make it clear what the ratio decidendi of their decision is, judgements are not set out with clear headings. Therefore it is up to the person reading the judgement to determine what exactly the ratio decidendi is. Also in the appeal courts, the decision is made by more than one judge. Even if all the judges reach the same decision they may have arrived at

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1180
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay