Explain, using examples, what is meant by delegated legislation. Describe how delegated legislation is controlled by both judges and Parliament.
(a) Explain, using examples, what is meant by delegated legislation. Describe how delegated legislation is controlled by both judges and Parliament. An enabling Act of parliament authorises somebody else or another organisation other than parliament to make laws. This form of legislating is called 'delegated legislation'. These powers that have been granted to certain bodies are exercised through statutory instruments, orders in Council, or bye-laws. Examples of delegated legislation by a local authority are the legislating of a Bye-law, made by Bristol city council concerning the fouling of pavements by dogs. This delegated legislation by the council stemmed from the Local government Act 1972. An example of an individual possessing delegated legislative powers was where the secretary of State created Motor cycles (protective Helmets) Regulations 1980, stemming from the parent act - Road Traffic act 1988. When parliament delegates legislation, the powers by the delegated authority are chosen by parliament when setting the enabling act. Before an individual, such as a government minister or another authority that possesses legislative powers, can make an act, they may have to undergo consultations with specified organisations or people. This allows them to point out any faults with the proposals. When ministers are delegated legislative power, parliament requires them to
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the mischief rule
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the mischief rule (10 marks) The mischief rule is where judges look for as mischief or gap in the law that Parliament designed an Act to remedy. The judges must interpret the act as to fill the gap and to remedy the mischief that Parliament had been aiming to remedy. The mischief rule originates from Heydon's case (1584), here the judges said that the court should consider four things when attempting to interpret a statutory provision: common law before the act; what was the defect or mischief; what does the act try to do; what is the real reason for the act. An advantage of the mischief rule is that application of this rule avoids absurd and unjust outcomes because the judges are looking to remedy the law. This follows Parliaments intent and avoids an absurd result. A case which uses the mischief rule and shows that by applying this rule judges can avoid absurd outcomes is Smith V Hughes (1960). Under the street offences act it was an offence to solicit in the street or a public place. So prostitutes solicited men from their balconies. Lord Parker looked at the mischief that the Act came to remedy, this was to clean up the streets, so the court found the defendants guilty as it didn't matter where the soliciting originated from. Another advantage of the mischief rule is that it promotes flexibility because the judges decide what
Briefly explain the meaning of, and reasons for, strict liability as a criminal offence
Briefly explain the meaning of, and reasons for, strict liability as a criminal offence (8 marks) Strict liability are offences which require no mens rea. A person can be guilty of the offence by just having the actus reus. This can seem unfair as one may not have the intention to commit the offence but just by having the conduct and consequence is sufficient. For example, in relation to speeding, it is sufficient if one can prove that they are above the speed limit, the intention of speeding is not required. As seen in the case of Larsonneur, the defendant didn't have the intention to return back to the UK, hence there was no mens rea; however, the act of being present in the UK was sufficient for a strict liability offence. Some examples of strict liability offences can include parking and speeding offences, selling unfit food for human consumption, health and safety at work regulations, trade description offences etc. Even though these offences may seem small, they are common as nearly 50% of strict liability cases are taken to court. The type of court would depend on the fine limit; i.e. the Magistrates court would fine up to £5000, however, the Crown court do not have a maximum penalty, but in severe cases, it could lead to imprisonment. The case of Gommon (Hong Kong) LTD V Attorney General for Hong Kong was a House of Lords case. Lord Garmon sets out the
Billy Joel Business Ethics and Law Case Study. In the above case scenario, the oral contract that was made between the seller and the buyer are not binding in the court of law in accordance to the contract law.
Business Ethics & Law Case Study Case Study Billy Joel decided he wanted to learn to play the violin for his next set of concerts. He called a violin salesman in New York and asked if he had any for sale. The salesman stated he had a Stradivarius and a Guarnerius (two famous brands of violins) and offered to sell them to Billy for $80,000 and $24,000, respectively. Billy agreed, over the phone, to purchase the violins from the salesman and told him he would be in town the next week to pick them up. Billy didn't show up for two months, and when he entered the store, the salesman wasn't there. His wife, Margaret, was there in the store, however, and she had full knowledge of the deal cut between her husband and Billy. (She'd heard her husband whining, complaining, and wailing about Billy not showing up for the last 2 months - and she was really sick of hearing about it.) Billy asked to see the violins, and Margaret showed him both of them. Billy stated he would agree to pay $65,000 for both of them, and Margaret, knowing that they were counterfeits and only worth $2,000 AND realizing that their house was about to go into foreclosure, agreed to the reduction in price and sold Billy the two violins for $65,000. She gave him a bill of sale that she wrote out on a note pad on the counter, which said, "Paid in full. Strativarus and Granruius violans. $65,000. Chk # 4301 Billy
Using relevant case law explain why the distinction between an invitation to treat and an offer is important in Contract law.
Using relevant case law explain why the distinction between an invitation to treat and an offer is important in Contract law. An 'invitation to treat' is inviting parties to create a contract. It represents the preliminary stage of negotiation. A person making an invitation to treat does not intend to be bound as soon as it is accepted by the person to whom the statement is addressed. An invitation to treat is always a fixed price and a choice; it is not an offer to sell. Newspapers and catalogues are examples of invitations to treat. An 'offer' is defined as a statement of willingness where the person who is making the offer (offeror), promises to be bound in a contract if the terms of the offer are accepted by the person accepting the offer (offeree). An individual or organisation can make an offer to another individual (bilateral) another company or to anyone in the world (unilateral). An offer can be "express"- for example if A tells B he will sell his radio for £30. An offer can also be "implied" from conduct - for example when A brings goods to the supermarket cash desk. It is tough to differentiate between an invitation to treat and an offer as it depends on the intention of the party making an invitation to treat which is shown in Pharmaceutical Society of GB v Boots Cash Chemists Ltd [1932] 1 QB 401, where the defendants changed the format of their shop
Voluntary Manslaghter - Notes and Evaluation.
Voluntary Manslaughter Voluntary Manslaughter is the term given to situations in which the defendant would be guilty of murder (i.e. he had the intention to kill or cause GBH) but due to a mitigating factor he is only guilty of manslaughter. These mitigating factors are when the killing occurs when the defendant is under diminished responsibility, provocation or a suicide pact. All of these defences are set out in the Homicide Act 1957. The defences are only available to murder and are only partial defences, which means that the defendant is not completely acquitted; the charge is reduced to manslaughter. Provocation - S3 Homicide Act 1957 "Where, on a charge of murder, there is evidence on which the jury can find that the person charged was provoked (whether by things done or by things said or by both together) to lose his self control, the question whether the provocation was enough to make a reasonable man do as he did shall be left to be determined by the jury." The defence consists of two elements; 1.) Did the defendant lose his self control? 2.) Would a reasonable person have lost his self-control? .) Did the defendant lose his self control? This is a subjective test in which the jury must be satisfied that the defendant lost his self control as a result of the provocation. In Duffy (1949) it was said that there must be a "sudden and temporary loss of self
Common Law and Equity - its history and development
a) Briefly explain what William I found when he arrived in 1066 and what law he began to develop. William I was born in 1027 in Chateau Falaise in Falaise Normandy, France He was crowned Duke of Normandy at the age of 7. He was the first Norman King of England. When the Edward the Confessor passed away, there were three claimants-William, Harold Godwinson and Harald Hardrada. Edward had promised William the throne in London when he visited him there in 1052 but by vote of Witnagemot along with Edward's will Harold Godwinson was crowned King by Archbishop Aldred in January 1066. William was not happy so he submitted a claim to the English throne to Pope Alexander II, who sent him a consecrated banner in support. William then organised a council of war at Lillebone and in January began to assemble an army in Normandy. He defeated Harold's army on 25th September 1066 and arrived in England on 28th September 1066. When William I invaded England in 1066, he found out that in England there was no legal system or what is now called 'English law'. The law around the country was different with every area having their own laws. The legal system consisted of local courts known as the borough, shire and hundred courts. He did not completely destroy the laws he found around the country. Instead he preserved them. Eventually they were used as a foundation for the common law. He
The english legal system unit1 assignment3 three part question
(a) The HofL has declared that the system of precedent is an indispensable foundation providing certainty in the law. Explain how the system of precedent operates to pursue the goal of certainty whilst ensuring that certainty does not result in rigidity This essay seeks to consider the system of precedent being 'an indispensable foundation providing certainty in law.' In doing so it will also assess associated advantages and disadvantages with the current system. Finally, discussing whether or not 'certainty' has the effect of rigidity in the law. In essence, the Judicial Precedent doctrine refers to the fact that a decision of a higher court will be binding on an equal or lower court. The House of Lords stands at the summit of this hierarchy and its decisions are binding on all courts. The next court in the hierarchy is the Court of Appeal, and further down are the Divisional Courts, High Courts, Crown Courts, County Courts and Magistrate Courts. Our system of precedent (case law) means, in its simplest form, that Judges can adapt the law to suit changing circumstances and that a lower Court must follow Judgments issued by higher Courts. Also, binding precedent is based on the view that it is not the function of a judge to make law, but to decide cases in accordance with existing rules. Since Parliament is 'sovereign' it is the function of Parliament to make law.
A contract by definition is an agreement between two parties by which both parties are bound by the
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DEVISION) BETWEEN: ERIC POLLARD (APPELLANT) -AND- VIV WINDSOR (RESPONDENT) WRITTEN ARGUMENT - SENIOR RESPONDENT; ISI BACKGROUND Viv Windsor bought a local shop and a computer, Anxious to please the locals, put an advert in the local news paper on a Saturday, stating that she would sell luxury chocolate shortbread for £2.50 instead of the recommended retail price of £5. She also stated that anyone wanting the shortbread should email her or come to the shop. Eric pollard, the appellant saw the email at 4.30pm on Saturday and sent her email on the same day. She realised that evening that she was making lose so she decided to revoke the advert. She contacted the newspaper who published her revocation 9.am the next morning. The paper got delivered to Eric at 10.30am Viv checked her email at 10.35am, She replied stating that the discount was no longer available. Eric sued her for breach of contract. A GROUND OF APPEAL There was no contract between Viv and Eric since the notice in the paper was not an offer but an invitation to treat. ARGUEMENT A contract by definition is an agreement between two parties by which both parties are bound by the law and which can therefore be enforced in a court or other equivalent forum. The law of contract has been known to
LAW OF DELICT
Law case studies for Delict DEBBIE GUNN CASE STUDY 1 Q1) What is a duty of care? A duty of care can be defined as a legal obligation, to give a level of care towards another individual, to avoid injury or harm to that individual or their property. It is that 'a person should take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that they could reasonably foresee to harm their neighbour'. This can be defined as say a father had a duty of care to a sick child to get that child to a doctor, if that father had done so he had acted to help that child so had acted in his duty to care, had he failed to do so and not have called the doctor to help then this would have been classed as an 'omission' or failure to act. In Danny's case he did not take reasonable care Under the law of Delict negligence is harm caused unintentionally and negligence claims come about because the person who is at fault or caused the harm owed a duty of care and has breached this by causing harm, loss or damage to the pursuer. In order to succeed when bringing a negligence claim the pursuer must show that the defender owed him/her a duty of care and the defender was in the position to cause harm which they failed to prevent occurring and the pursuer must also show that it was the defenders breach of duty that was the main cause for the loss or harm caused by him/her. The legal precedent for
