How judges make law uk essay this is the case then it would support the argument that judges are mere declarers of the law — they are given set rules that they must abide by; however, they can choose to interpret the law in any way they wish.
In this particular case when the defendant appealed, Lord Steyn relied on the provisions of a statute — section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act  - to protect the rights of the complainant and to prove that the rigidity of the content in the statute was too great for even himself to attempt to change.
We need to find out, is there anything which makes the precedent strict? Theories on the role of a judge have dated back to that of an anthropological approach which looks to when various tribes used differing methods to resolve disputes.
Law is not equal to rules alone. The judge works towards a solution that can be seen as an extension of principle by process of analogy. However, the judiciary also makes law by way of judicial pronouncements.
It now exists in such a way so as to challenge the way that a judge uses what little individual discretion he has to interpret the written words of a statute. Ronald Dworkin is a famous common law theorist who believes in a similar theory of the law as being "the nature of legal argument which lies in the best moral interpretation of existing social practices.
In Kleinwort Benson V Lincoln City Council, the House of Lords abolished a two hundred years old common law principle that money paid by mistake of law is not refundable. The men are put on trial for murder and are found guilty. So, the question nowadays may arise as to whether the decisions judges make are construed according to an innate bias; a personal manipulation of the rules similar to that of how the Azande chicken diviners created rules.
It is submitted that they do both things: Barristers, solicitors, law students and the general public often question the precise role of a judge — puzzled over whether judges are authoritarian law-makers, or if their profession makes them mere declarers or announcers of the law.
They are held back by various mechanisms from straying too far from the written words of the common law. In Re Pinochet the House of Lords reversed its own previous decision for the first time.
Judges while making decisions have choices. The purposive approach, reminiscent to the Golden Rule, proposes that, where the wording of the law leads to absurdities, the judge must take the step to ensure that the anomaly or ambiguity is cleared.
This distinguished the case from Balfour v Balfour. Therefore, the incorporation of statutes into the set question clearly depicts how it supports the fact that judges can only ever declare law. But after practice statement issued by Lord Gardiner the House of Lords was no longer bound by precedent.
Various judges were asked to make comments on the actions of the men — their impulsive and instinctive moves which culminated in the death of another. In their practice judges also follow the method of reversing.
One final How judges make law uk essay which again assists in illustrating the importance and power of a judge to interpret facts and create new law is from the fictitious case of the Speluncean Explorers. Judicial dissent — common law and civil law traditions.
Each of us is qualified to a high level in our area of expertise, and we can write you a fully researched, fully referenced complete original answer to your essay question. Jeremy Bentham ridicules the idea that all laws in statutes are made by Parliament; he believes that judges can and do make law for men.
As Lord Scarman states: Others take a more creative standpoint. Furthermore, the defendant stated that because himself and the complainant had had past sexual relationships with one another, this would exclude him from being convicted of rape.
Therefore a concise discussion of these arguments is necessary before we come to any conclusion regarding this topic. If the decision of the lower court is appealed to a higher one, the higher court may change it if feels that the lower court has been wrongly interpreted law. They have to decide whether the defendant should go to prison, whether the plaintiff should receive compensation, whether a contract dispute is based upon valid documentation and precisely what it is that may constitute true and demonstrable slander.
In such a case, his duty would require him to be not only a mere declarer of the law, but also a creator of a newer, more appropriate and fairer law which will ensure that justice ultimately prevails.
In this essay I will consider a number of examples and cases which suggest that the statement is in fact valid. It is a practice of judiciary to look upon. There can be distinguishing, overruling, reversing or disapproving.
The common law is meant to be a collective common sense view of the judges: Therefore despite our strict views of stare decisis there exists the role of choice in our judicial process. The old-fashioned beliefs and laws were dramatically changed by the judges who recognized a basic requirement to alter traditional views that had been established by prominent judges in the 18th Century.
Just complete our simple order form and you could have your customised Coursework work in your email box, in as little as 3 hours.
No matter how ideal this would be, it remains unpracticed due to statutes and the common law ensuring that judges are completely bound. On the other hand law made by judges which is called case law is flexible.
Overruling may occur where the decision in an earlier case is wrongly decided. Thus, because Dworkin perceives law as something highly expansive, he offers more props to the judges in order to assist them in developing the laws as opposed to making new ones.The Constitutional Law of UK in Comparison with the Constitutional law of Russia of the two Houses of Parliament.
The strongest aspect of separation is therefore, the independence of the judiciary from both the executive and the legislature, although the most senior judges, as members of the House of Lords, can be involved in making legislation/5(8).
This essay has been submitted by a law student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. Areas Which Judges Make Law.
This essay seeks to establish several areas in which judges do make law. Presently a judge’s role is not to make law but to uphold the laws which are made by the parliament.
Do Judges Make Law Uk Essay As the UKs leading essay and dissertation The Definition Of The Doctrine Of Judicial Precedent Law General Essay. Crowed several times - the inhumeces go off without a moon, looking at the superlative chirm Ehud, steales quintessentially cataclysmic Whitechapel.
Do Judges Make Law University of London Common Law Reasoning and Institutions Essay Title: ‘Judicial precedent is best understood as a practice of the courts and not as a set of binding rules. As a practice it could be refined or changed by the courts as they wish. Do Judges Make Laws?
Do Judges Make Laws? Essay. Words Dec 16th, 8 Pages. Show More. Parliamentary sovereignty is the key stone in the British Constitution.
If judges were to make law then they would be contradicting this doctrine. The legislative supremacy disqualifies the courts power to review the validity of legislation, refer to. Do Judges Make Law “Although judges have traditionally seen themselves as declaring or finding rather than creating law, and frequently state that making law is the prerogative of Parliament, there are several areas in which they clearly do make law." This essay seeks to .Download