Philosophy, Political Morality and History: Explaining the Enduring Resonance of the Hart-Fuller Debate 3
A moral case for positivism? It is interesting to note, however, that at the foundation of Hart's argument lay not so much an analytic as a substantive moral claim,1 the appeal of which might itself be thought to depend in important part on a cluster of empirical claims. It is, according to him, morally preferable, more honest, to look clearly at the variety of reasons bearing on an ethically problematic decision rather than to close off debate by dismissing certain considerations as irrelevant, or by arguing that something never was the law because it ought not to have been the law. In a later confrontation with his Oxford successor, Ronald Dworkin, Hart similarly characterized Dworkin's suggestion that judges might sometimes be morally justified in lying about what the law requires in order to avoid an unjust conclusion as an entirely unnecessary and obfuscating distortion of a conceptually straightforward, if morally problematic, issue.2 The straightforward conceptual point is that, according to clear positivist criteria, a standard is identified as law. The complex issue is the practical conclusion which judges or other actors should draw from this identification where the standard is morally dubious or clearly iniquitous. The key point about the Hart-Fuller debate is that - unusually in Hart's jurisprudence - these questions are drawn together, in a juxtaposition
legal methods
legal
Explain what is meant by a conditional fee agreement and when it is used; and (ii) Describe the other ways of funding legal help and representation when bringing a civil claim.
A) (i) Explain what is meant by a conditional fee agreement and when it is used; and (ii) Describe the other ways of funding legal help and representation when bringing a civil claim. Introduction Going to court can be a very expensive procedure, especially when the person in question has insufficient funds to cover all of the expenses. These include the solicitors cost and (in a situation that they lose the case) all of the opposing sides expenditures along with the fee they are being ordered to pay. This means that many people who have a strong and deserving case don't follow it up because of the risk of losing and having to pay the other sides' costs as well as their own. To help get rid of this problem the government developed conditional fee agreements. But not all legal problems require representation in court. Some situations can be settled outside of court, saving unnecessary hassle and expense. Other organisations and help centres have been set up to help people with legal advice and to give them general information. I will discuss these places in further detail later on in my essay. Conditional Fee Agreements In 1990 section 58 of the legal services act allowed conditional fee agreements to help people in situations I have previously mentioned, but only in cases of personal injury, insolvency and human rights. In 1998 conditional fee agreements were extended to
Do we agree with Lord Diplock's view that the British Constitution is firmly based on the separation of powers?
"It cannot be too strongly emphasised that the British Constitution, though largely unwritten, is firmly based on the separation of powers" Duport Steels v Sirs [1980] 1 WLR 142, per Lord Diplock The question here is, do we agree with Lord Diplock's view that the British Constitution is firmly based on the separation of powers? In addressing Lord Diplock's view, the first point to consider is the meaning of the doctrine, 'the separation of powers' and its origin then consider whether or not there's a separation of powers in the British constitution in which the overlaps between the legislative, executive and judiciary arms of the British constitution will be examined. The doctrine of separation of powers has emerged in several forms at different periods and in different contexts and is traceable back to Aristotle; it was developed by Locke; its best known formulation, by the French political philosopher Montesquieu, was based on an analysis of the English constitution of the early eighteenth century. The doctrine, formulated by Montesquieu in L'Espirit des Lois briefly stated the following. * There are three main classes of governmental functions: the legislative, the executive and the judicial. * There are (or should be) three main organs of government in a State: the Legislature the Executive and the Judiciary. * To concentrate more than on class of function in any
The reality of the Community's constitution lies not in the words of the Treaty, but in its creation
The reality of the Community's constitution lies not in the words of the Treaty, but in its creation Introduction. It is clear that both the Commission and the European Court of Justice have important roles to play, as supranational institutions, in the integration of Europe. Both have shown themselves to be powerful and influential. I shall now endeavour to analyse the exact importance of the roles they play within the European Community (hereafter refered to as 'the EC') before concluding which, in my view, is the more dominant. With regards to the Commission I intend to show the vital role it has to play in the creation of legislation, be it primary or secondary, and in the protection of the Community's goals and objectives. This is done both by means of regulations and directives and by ensuring such regulations and directives are implemented by Member States. Finally I shall briefly mention the Commission's role as the international representative of the Community. Moving on to the European Court of Justice I will demonstrate the key part it also has played in the promotion of a united Europe. This has been done through the creation of doctrines such as direct and indirect effect, mutual recognition and state liability, as well as that of EC supremacy. Having closely looked at these two institutions I shall lastly look at their dependance on each other before
To what extent has the 1986 and the 2000 legislation succeeded in meeting this objective?
AC339 Business Restructuring " Our aim is to restore respect for the law of insolvency and to ensure that the solutions which it is called to provide are as fair and equitable as can reasonably be achieved in the interests of justice": Para 1982 Report of the Review Committee: Insolvency Law and Practice. Cmnd 8558 To what extent has the 1986 and the 2000 legislation succeeded in meeting this objective? Word count: 1562 Muminur Rahman BA Accounting and Management [email protected] Introduction This study begins by discussing some historical developments of insolvency law before the Insolvency Act of 1986, I will be dwelling on a number of discussion specifically upon the influence of the report by the Review Committee on Insolvency Law and Practice (Cork Committee) to the 1986 legislation, secondly focusing on the Insolvency Act of 2000 and then briefly discussing the Enterprise Act of 2002, furthermore this study would discuss the benefits Insolvency law to stakeholders of company and society at large, arguably recent studies have augmented the less honourable mechanisms that are available for insolvency practitioners resulting in conflict of interest, practitioner further escape scrutiny because of the veil promoted by statutory legislation, this we will also discuss later as well as some proposals for future changes. This study begins by looking at the
Outline how someone currently studying for A' levels can train and qualify either as a Barrister or as a Solicitor.
LAW HOMEWORK a) Outline how someone currently studying for A' levels can train and qualify either as a Barrister or as a Solicitor. Training of Solicitor If a person wants a profession in the legal system it is wise for them to do A' level in law which takes two years. To become a solicitor it is usual to have a law degree which will take three years. The next stage is the one year legal practice course. This is much more practically based than the previous law society finals course and includes training in skills such as client interviewing, negotiation, advocacy, drafting documents and legal research. Even when this course has been passed. The student is still not a qualified as a solicitor. They must next obtain a training contract under which they work in a solicitor's firm for two years getting practical experience. During this two year training contract the trainee will be paid, though not at the same rate as a fully qualified solicitor, the trainee will be supervised at all time. They will also have to complete a 20 day professional's skills course which builds up on the skills learnt on the LPC (legal practice course). At the end of the two years the trainee will be admitted as a solicitor by the law society and their name will be added to the roll (list) of solicitors. Even after qualifying a solicitor has to attend continuing education course to keep their
Government and politics assignment - Distinguish between a codified and uncodified constitution?
Government and politics assignment Distinguish between a codified and uncodified constitution? A constitution is a body of rules that defines the manner in which a state or society is organised. It sets out the way in which sovereign power is distributed between the government and the people, and between the government's constituent parts. In so doing, a constitution provides a framework upon which more complex rules; structures and processes can be built. There are two types of constitution. A codified constitution consists of a full and authoritative set of rules written down in a single place example the us constitution and the other which is less tangible, often having evolved over time and having become as much reliant on traditions and customs as any written documents. This is the uncodified constitution for example the constitution of the United Kingdom. This does not mean that the constitution of the United Kingdom is un written. The reason why it is uncodifed is because in Britain we do not have a single written document. What are the main sources of the uk constitution? The first source of the UK constitution is the statute law which are acts of parliament. Some of these statutes play a significant role in outlining the extent and distribution of government powers; the parliament acts of 1911 and 1949,for example, limit the power of the House of Lords. Other
"What are the distinctions if any between civil and criminal law?"
"What are the distinctions if any between civil and criminal law?" Justice should be the upholding of rights and the punishment of wrongs by the law. Any society has a duty to its citizens to do the best it can to provide them with laws, which, if obeyed, will give them a reasonably safe environment. These laws will also form a framework in which to live our lives. Whether in criminal or civil law we each have a responsibility for our actions towards others. Criminal law is the upholding of standards and punishment of those who break laws and offend against society, theft is an example of a criminal offence. Civil law is there to provide a system for individuals to resolve their disagreements in a way, which is both efficient and ultimate. Breach of contract and defamation (also known as libel and slander) are two examples of offences that would be heard under civil law. " The Criminal Justice System exists to help protect us from crime, and to ensure that criminals are punished. The Civil Justice system is there to help people resolve their disputes fairly and peacefully"(Lord Irvine of Lairg, Lord Chancellor, Modernising Justice 1998) There are seven main differences between Civil and Criminal law. The purpose of the two types of laws, the people who bring the cases to court, the courts hearing the cases, the terminology used in the different laws and the different
On December 23, 2003, the Supreme Court of Canada said in a decision that Canada's laws against possessing small amounts of marijuana do not
MARIJUANA Should Marijuana be decriminalized? Amandeep Sekhon Introduction to Canadian Legal System -1010U (40300) Dr. Wesley Crichlow November 08, 2005 Canada's marijuana law and the debate over decriminalization have finally initiated. Officials have taken a step forward. Ever since marijuana was first banned in Canada under the 1923 Opium and Drug Act, those who oppose believe the criminal penalties set for possession of the drug is too harsh. However, since May 1997, illicit drugs such as marijuana have been covered by the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Khoo, 2004). The decriminalization supporters position facts with popular beliefs being that marijuana is unhealthy and leads to criminal provocation. However, in keeping marijuana illegal, this does ignore the facts that marijuana is also used for medical or religious purposes and that drugs users are our fellow citizens who are incarcerated rising the level of prisoner population in Canada. Though, effective July 31, 2002 Canada became the first country to adopt a system regulating the medicinal use of marijuana. This paper will discuss the current issues of the marijuana addressing both sides, and also support marijuana decriminalization by the OSDUS survey report and Supreme Court cases. The question is not whether to support or not support marijuana use, most people are better off not using marijuana. The