Law of Tort
Law of Tort Module Code: LAW 324 M1 Tutor: Brian Collins Assignment Question: 1 In Rylands v Fletcher (1865) Lord Cairns stated that liability thereunder would only arise when the accumulation amounted to a non-natural use of the land. Explain fully what is meant by this concept and trace its development in case law to the present day. This rule in Rylands v Fletcher originated in the tort of nuisance in the nineteenth century during the industrial revolution. It was based on the principle that if a person purchased land or put his land to use for industrial purposes, and as a result damage was caused to a neighbours land, then the cost of that damage would be borne by the industrialist, without the need for the claimant to prove fault. The essence of the rule is that it is a form of strict liability for the escape of 'things' likely to cause damage, that have been brought onto land. Probably the best example of the rule functioning is in Rylands v Fletcher1 itself. The defendant, a mill owner, employed an independent contractor to build a reservoir on his land, the contractor failed to block disused mine shafts that he had come across on the site. When the reservoir was filled, the water escaped down the shafts and flooded the plaintiffs adjoining mine, causing damage estimated at almost £1000. D had not been negligent because he could not have known about the shafts
money laundering
It is nearly 3 years to the day since the U.K anti-money laundering legislation was significantly amended and consolidated with the implementation of the Proceeds of Crimes Act 2002(POCA).It is only a matter of days before the 2nd European Directive, the so called EUgatekeepers initiative, will be implemented in the United Kingdom by the much Money Laundering Regulations 2003.The few years consultation and implementation period ends on the 1st March. There is little doubt that the impetus behind the drive of governments worldwide to implement legislation to combat money laundering was given extra force by the events of September 11 2001.To this end attention has increasingly focused non gatekeepers the professionals such as lawyers, tax advisers and accountants who have become as essential resource to the criminals who nee to clean huge sums of money made from the proceeds of crime. All EU members will have to implement the directive, including the new members joining the Union last year. At the time of writing, the following countries have fully implemented the second directive; Austria, Belgium, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Spain, the Netherlands and the U.K.Member states have a level of discretion in implementing the directive. It is important, therefore, that regulated UK professionals and business ensure that their own procedures are independently compliant with the 2003
Merging of the Legal Professions.
Merging of the Legal Professions The English legal profession is atypical of the majority of the rest of the world due the fact that is divided. Unlike countries such as the USA where they have just one lawyer known as an 'advocate´, in England we have two different types, each with different roles and responsibilities within the system. The principal distinguishing factor between them is that solicitors primarily do the paperwork whereas the role of barristers is mainly concerned with advocacy. The profession has been separated in such a way ever since the nineteenth century as a result of an agreement with the Bar. Solicitors were given the job of direct client contact and the writing of all legal documents in exchange for barristers to have the exclusive rights of audience in the higher courts and eligibility to become senior judges. In spite of this over recent years there has been a sequence of changes resulting in gradual progression towards the merger of the two legal professions. The first step towards an attempt at equality for solicitors and barristers came in 1969 when the Law Society argued for rights of audience in the higher courts. However, their plea was essentially unsuccessful as the Beeching Report recommended that this should only be allowed if there were insufficient numbers of barristers, and even then this right could only been permitted by the Lord
Stop and Search
Stop and Search This essay shall explore various issues in relation to police stop and search such as racism and discrimination directed from the police force and the pros and cons of the police powers of stop and search. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) was introduced in order to balance the competing demands of bringing offenders to justice whilst preserving and maintaining the rights and liberties of suspects. In section (a) of this question, paying particular attention to the police powers of stop and search, this essay shall discuss and evaluate whether the balance of bringing offenders to justice whilst preserving the rights and liberties of suspects has been achieved in practice. In the second part of this question, section (b), my view will be given on whether the various steps taken by the government since 1999 to increase public confidence in stop and search procedures will remedy any perceived problems in this regard. Section (a) The Act (PACE) was the product of a Royal Commission set up following an earlier miscarriage of justice.1 This was in relation to the murder of a man in 1977 which resulted in three boys aged 14, 15 and 18, one of whom was educationally subnormal2, being arrested, interrogated and as a result of their confessions charged with murder. However, three years later all three were released after a report into the case (Fisher
'The actions of Nellie Hall alocal Birmingham Suffragette - source related study.
William Pearson Assignment 2: 'The actions of Nellie Hall a local Birmingham Suffragette 3) What has happened to Nellie Hall? Source d is a letter from prison; this shows that she has been sent there for a crime. So before this letter has been sent I can assume that she has committed a crime, been arrested, has had a trial in court then finally been sent to prison. The letter itself is unusual, it is a set printed letter where she can fill in space but it also has an extra comment at the bottom written by Nellie Hall. It was sent on 23rd July 1913, saying that she was in good health. Her statement at the bottom has several interesting parts to it. "I think that I might be allowed to have a letter from you." This suggests that she not only would like a letter but also really wants her family to write back to her in prison. It is not only addressed to her family but she also has added the word, 'all' which suggests she would like her suffragette friends to see the letter aswell. It also says: "I have 21 days 2nd division" This is where she is situated in the prison according to her crime. 2nd division is for political crimes showing she has done something against the government, which is common for a suffragette. It says she has 21 days, the length of her sentence, but she goes on to say that she hopes to be out soon. "I am not taking food and water. I hope to
Racial discrimination
INTRODUCTION My aims and objectives for this report are to research the issue of discrimination and other factors that relate to it. My initial research that I conducted allowed me to gain an insight into how much discrimination can affect employees within organisations and also the efforts that are taking place to combat the problems. Therefore I came up with issues that I will look into further and will aid me in answering the topic question. These factors are:- - Discrimination. - Legislation. - Trade Unions. - Company methods. The methods of research I will use for this report will be based on textbooks and the internet as these will help me in obtaining theories on the subject of discrimination but will also give me information on linking discrimination with the workplace. WHAT IS DISCRIMINATION? The Office of Equal Employment Opportunity at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences states that 'Discrimination is defined in civil rights law as unfavourable or unfair treatment of a person or class of persons in comparison to others who are not members of the protected class because of race, sex, colour, religion, national origin, age, physical/mental handicap, sexual harassment, sexual orientation or reprisal for opposition to discriminatory practices or participation
Is there any rational basis for the distinction which criminal law draws between acts and omissions? How consistently is the distinction maintained?
Is there any rational basis for the distinction which criminal law draws between acts and omissions? How consistently is the distinction maintained? "I will punish you as your deeds deserve", the Lord says in the Bible.1 God told Adam to keep away of eating from the tree. Adam was disobedient and ate of the tree. Adam was removed from heaven as a consequence of his disobedience. God told the devil to bow in front of Adam. The devil refused to do so. The devil was cursed as a consequence of his disobedience. To make it simple. The conduct of Adam the English legal system would call an act. The conduct of the devil the English legal system would call an omission. It is perfectly clear and well established to punish people for their deeds. But why punish people for things they have done not? Are we not all omitting to everything in the world what is not done. This would mean we all are a conditio in conditio sine qua non. Similar to the butterfly in Australia is a conditio for the storm in Singapore. Williams2 makes it clear: "We omit to do everything in the world that is not done", but only "those of us omit in law who are under a duty to act". This duty-theory is widely acknowledged in numerous cases. Hogan however calls it ill-defined. He rather would like to keep the issue "simply one of causation"3. The question for him is rather more, whether the conduct of the
Parliamentary Sovereignty
Parliamentary Sovereignty: In the absence of a written constitution, the concept of parliamentary sovereignty, or supremacy, is often cited as one of the cornerstones of the United Kingdom constitution. The traditional analysis of the United Kingdom's constitution identifies, as one of its key features, the notion that Parliament, as the legislature, is sovereign, by which is meant the absence of any legal restraint on the legislative powers of the United Kingdom Parliament. The classical definition of sovereignty, offered from a constitutional law rather than a jurisprudential perspective is that of AV Dicey. Dicey stated that - Parliament is the supreme law making body and may enact laws on any subject matter; No Parliament can may be bound by a predecessor or bind a successor; No person or body - including a court of law - may question the validity of the Parliament's enactments. In effect, it means that Parliament has competence to alter any aspect of the constitution, and interference in all matters relating to individual constitutional rights. As Laws LJ observed in Thoburn v Sunderland City Council (2002), Parliament cannot bind its successors by stipulating against repeal, wholly or partly, of any legislation - the common law does not recognize any such power. Being sovereign Parliament cannot abandon its sovereignty. Parliaments has unlimited law making power.
Parliamentary sovereignty
Has Parliamentary sovereignty survived the UK's membership of the European Community/European Union and the effects of the Human Rights Act 1998? Parliamentary sovereignty is the 'basic principle' of the UK's unwritten constitution (Loveland, 2003, p.21). One of the sources used in describing this concept is Dicey's (1961) legal theory, which splits Parliamentary sovereignty into two limbs. The positive limb articulates that "Parliament has the right to make or unmake any law whatever", while the negative limb expresses that "no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament" (p.3). Thus, the doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty can be summarised as follows: Parliament may pass legislation concerning anything; it neither bind its successors nor be bound by its predecessors; and only Parliament can change or reverse an Act of Parliament. Wade (1955) extended this by stating that the only limit to Parliament's legal power is that it cannot detract from its own continuing sovereignty. Parliamentary sovereignty prevents judicial review of domestic law. Since the late 20th Century, this concept has undergone erosion from devolution in Scotland, the increasing use of referendums, the UK's accession to the EU and the incorporation of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic law. In
Parliamentary Supremacy
Westminster International University in Tashkent BA Commercial Law 2010 - 2011 To be completed by the student Student's ID number 00001313 Module name Legal Systems Module code UZB405 Tutor Liya Sizova Individual assignment ? Group assignment ( Submission deadline 06.12.2010 I certify that all material in this coursework which is not my own work has been acknowledged and I am fully aware of the consequences of plagiarism. Signed For Academic Registrar use only PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY vs. DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT Contents: Introduction: 3 Sovereignty of Parliament in England: 3 Doctrine of Precedent: 4 Evaluation: 5 Bibliography: 6 Printed Source(s): 6 Online Sources: 6 Cases: 6 "Our constitution, in short, is a judge-made constitution, and it bears on its face all the features, good and bad, of judge-made law." - A. V. Dicey . Introduction: The Parliament of UK is one of the most peculiar institutions in the UK. It can simply change anything by a simple majority. One of its main functions is to create and amend laws. This role of Parliament has mainly developed in the past two-three decades. However, despite the growing implementation of statutes created by Parliament, I personally think case law (aka. precedent) has retained its importance in the English Legal System. The doctrine of precedent is based on the principle of stare decisis,
