PARLIAMENTARY LAW MAKING

The main legislative (law making) body in the UK is Parliament. It meets in the Palace of Westminster. In
a democracy, the view is that laws should only be made by the elected representatives of society. Laws
passed by Parliament are known as Acts of Parliament or statutes, and this source of law is usually
referred to as statute law. Parliament can also delegate their power of law making to the government
ministers and their departments to make detailed rules and regulations. The Legislative Process UK
Parliament consists of

■ House of Commons (elected) ■ House of Lords (hereditary or appointed peers) ■ Queen Members of
Parliament (MPs) sit in the House of Commons and represent a political party. They are elected by the
public. Under the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011, there must be a general election every five years. In
2020, the House of Lords consisted of a maximum of 92 hereditary peers (a title which could be passed
down through their family) ○ about 660 life peers (nominated by the prime minister, mostly former
politicians who have retired from House of Commons) the 26 most senior bishops in the Church of
England. In 2020, the House of Lords consisted of a maximum of 92 hereditary peers (a title which could
be passed down through their family), about 660 life peers (nominated by the prime minister, mostly
former politicians who have retired from House of Commons), the 26 most senior bishops in the Church
of England.

Green Papers and White Papers: If the government is unsure what law to introduce on a topic, it may
issue a Green Paper by the minister with responsibility for that matter. This is a consultative document.
Interested parties are invited to send comments to the relevant government department. Following this,
the government may publish a White Paper with its firm proposals for new law, taking into account the
views received during Green Paper consultation.

Consultation is valuable before any new law is framed. It allows the for mature consideration. From time
to time, governments are criticized for responding in a ‘knee-jerk’ fashion to incidents or situations and
As a result, rushing through law that has subsequently proved to be unworkable. This occurred with the
Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

Bills: The majority of Acts of Parliament are introduced by the government. They are initially drafted by
lawyers in the civil service, known as Parliamentary Counsel to the Treasury. These are referred to as
Bills. Instructions on what is to be included, and the effect the proposed law is intended to have, are
provided by the government department responsible for it. The Bill has to be drafted so that it
represents the government’s wishes, using correct legal wording so that there will not be any further
difficulties in applying it. It must be unambiguous, precise and comprehensive. Achieving all of these is
not easy, and there may be unforeseen problems with the language used, as discussed later in Statutory
Interpretation. A Bill only becomes an Act of Parliament if it successfully completes all the necessary
stages in Parliament.

Private Members’ Bills can also be sponsored by individual MPs. There is a ballot during each
parliamentary session. Twenty private members are selected who can take their turn in presenting a Bill
to Parliament. The time for debate is limited, so that only the first six or seven members in the ballot
have a realistic chance of introducing a Bill on their chosen topic. Relatively few Private Members’ Bills
become law. the Abortion Act 1967, which legalized abortion in the UK the Marriage Act 1994, which
allowed people to marry in any registered place, not only in register offices or religious buildings ○ the.
Ten-minute rule Backbenchers (MPs who do not have any official position in the government) can also
try to introduce a Bill through a ten-minute rule. MPs can make a speech for ten minutes supporting the
introduction of new legislation. This method is rarely successful, unless there is no opposition.

Public and private Bills A public Bill involves matters of public policy that affect either the whole country
or a large section of it. Most government Bills are in this category. ○ Constitutional Reform Act 2005 ○
Legal Services Act 2007 ○ Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015
Some Bills are designed to pass a law that will affect only individual people or corporations. These are
called private Bills. University College London Act 199

The Process in Parliament A Bill usually has to be passed by both Houses of Parliament. The process is
long and complex. A Bill may start in either the House of Commons or the House of Lords, with the
exception of finance Bills which only start in House of Commons. First Reading This is a formal
procedure, where the name and main aims of the Bill are read out. Usually, there will be no discussion
and no vote. Second Reading This is the main debate on the whole Bill, during which MPs deliberate the
principles behind the Bill. The debate focuses on the main principles rather than small details. The
Speaker controls all the debate and no one may speak without being called. At the end of the debate
there will be a vote, which is either verbal or formal: ○ If all members say ‘Aye’ that is the agreement
and if all members say ‘No’ that is a disagreement. If this happens, there is no use of formal vote. ○ If the
verbal vote is unclear or inconclusive, there will be a formal vote. There must be majority in favor of the
Bill for it to progress to the next stages. Committee Stage If the Bill passes the Second Reading, the
Committee Stage then examines each clause in detail. This is undertaken by a standing committee of 16-
50 MPs, chosen specifically for that Bill. During this stage, amendments to various words or clauses in
the Bill may be voted on and passed.

Report Stage The Report Stage is where the committee reports back to the House on any amendments
to the Bill. Amendments are debated in the House and either accepted or rejected, and further
amendments can be added. If there are no amendments, there will be no report stage – the Bill will go
straight to Third Reading. Third Reading This is the final vote on the Bill. It is almost a formality, since a
Bill that has passed through all the stages above is unlikely to fail at this stage. There is usually no debate
or vote. The House of Lords If the Bill started in the House of Commons, it now passes to the House of
Lords, where it goes through the similar stages to those in the House of Commons. If the House of Lords
makes amendments to the Bill, it goes back to House of Commons and if they do not accept the
amendments the Bill is sent back to House of Lords for reconsideration. This is known as ‘ping-pong’. If
the Bill started in the House of Lords, at this stage it then passes to the House of Commons for
consideration. By the end of this procedure, the Bill should have been fully agreed by both houses. The
Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 The power of the House of Lords to reject a Bill is limited by the
Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949. This allows a Bill to become law even if the House of Lords rejects it,
provided the Bill is reintroduced into the House of Commons in the next session of Parliament and
passes all the stages again there. The Principle behind the Parliament Acts is that the House of Lords is
not an elected body, and its function is to refine and add to the law rather than oppose the will of the
democratically elected

Royal Assent The final stage is where the monarch formally gives approval to the Bill and it then
becomes an Act of Parliament. This is now a formality and under the Royal Assent Act 1967, the
monarch will not even have the text of the Bills to which she is assenting; she will only have the short
title. Commencement of an Act Following the Royal Assent, the Act of Parliament comes into force on
midnight of that day, unless another data has been set. If not immediately, the Act itself states the date
when it will commence, or it passes responsibility to a government minister to set the commencement
date. Sometimes different sections of the Act are brought into force at different times.

Advantages of Parliamentary Law Making ● Law is made by elected representatives. This means it is
democratic. ● Acts of Parliament can reform whole areas of law in one new Act. Example: Fraud Act
2006 ● Acts of Parliament can also provide delegated legislation. ● Bills are debated upon, so there is
detailed consultation. ● Acts of Parliament cannot be challenged in Courts of law.

Disadvantages of Parliamentary Law Making ● Lack of time for Government and Parliament to have
inclination towards all the proposed reforms. ● A very time consuming method, can take months. ● Very
little time for Private Members’ Bill ● Acts of Parliament are often long and complicated ● Law becomes
more complicated through amendments. ● Sometimes Act coming into force becomes confusing

DELEGATED LEGISLATION

Criticisms of the use of delegated legislation

1. Takes law making away from democratically elected House of Commons a. Allows non elected people
to make law (not concerning bylaws as local authorities are elected by local citizens. b. Acceptable if
sufficient control but Parliaments control limited

2. Sub-delegation meaning law making authority handed down another level a. Causes comments such
as law being made by civil servants just being rubber stamped by Minster of department

3. Delegated legislation makes it difficult to discover what present law is a. Lack of publicity(made in
private)

4. Obscure wording leading to difficulties in understanding the law

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION

When interpreting statutes, judges use the literal, golden and mischief rules. Describe these rules and
assess how effective they are in helping judges to perform this task. Statutory interpretation is the
process in which the courts decide the actual meaning of a word or phrase in an Act of Parliament. The
courts ultimate goal is to determine the intention of Parliament and give effect to it. This is an important
component of judicial lawmaking as many cases come before the court due to disputes over the
meaning of statutes. Any decision made regarding the interpretation of an Act will change the tone for
future cases as it will set a new judicial precedent that future courts may have to follow.There are a few
reasons that these guides or methods for interpretation are necessary. Terms used by Parliament may
be broad or ambiguous, meaning that they have different ways of interpretation. Drafting errors may
also have occurred if the Parliamentary Counsel rushed to draft or amend a Bill after the second or third
reading. In addition, with the rapid advancement of technology, statutes may not cover new
developments. These new developments can also apply to the use of language that has changed. These
can affect very dated laws passed many decades ago that are still in force. Thus, these factors bring
about the need for statutory interpretation which can be done through traditional rules, which will be
explored in the following paragraphs.
The most straightforward of the traditional rules is the literal rule. This rule gives all text in statutes their
plain, ordinary meaning without consulting the context or specifics of a case, even if it may lead to an
absurd judgement that does not make sense. This form of statutory interpretation can promote
certainty and precision in the law and respects Parliamentary sovereignty. However, the literal rule has
its own set of problems. An example of this was seen in Whiteley v Chappell where a man was found not
guilty of impersonating a dead person to vote because a dead person no longer qualified as a ‘person’,
which is an absurd outcome. In addition, this method is inflexible, unable to adapt to individual
circumstances and reduces the role of a judge to a dictionary. While this type of interpretation may
come in handy in very specific circumstances, statutes cannot possibly cover every type of circumstance
if interpreted literally. Thus, this form of interpretation may limit the usefulness of the statute and
undermine its very purpose, because judges are unable to use much-needed context.

However, the next rule amends these shortfalls. To fill in the gaps left by the statute, and to prevent
absurdities arising from the literal rule, the golden rule is sometimes applied. The golden rule’s main
function is to enable the judge to substitute a reasonable meaning to the statue in light of its function as
a whole to prevent absurdities from arising. There are 2 types of applications to this rule, the narrow
view and the wider view. The narrow view, as seen in Jones v DPP, states that a judge can only choose
between the different meanings of a word. However, a wider view states that a judge can choose from
apply a meaning other than the ones derived from the wording of the statue to prevent injustice. An
example of this can be seen in Re Sigsworth, where a son who murdered his mother would have been
able to inherit her estate if the Administration of Estate Act was interpreted literally. Thus, to prevent
the man from benefiting from his crime, the court decided that the golden rule should be applied and
the man should not be able to inherit the estate at all. This rule is useful for judges to close loopholes
that the statute itself was not able to cover. They can choose from a meaning that makes sense in light
of the entire statute as a whole, which can promote the intentions of parliament. However, this method
may be a breach of power as a part of the law-making process has been shifted from Parliament to the
Judiciary, undermining the concept of the separation of powers, while also promoting uncertainty.
However, the shortfall of uncertainty can be rectified by the use of binding or persuasive precedent,
where the later courts must follow the interpretation of a higher court or an earlier court.

An extension of golden rule is the mischief rule. The definition of this rule was laid out in Heydon’s case,
which stated that judges should look at the mischief allowed by common law that the statute was meant
to remedy and to further that remedy through the interpretation of said statute. This rule was used in
Smith v Hughes where a prostitute was soliciting from the balcony of a private building to pedestrians.
To remedy the problem the Street Offences Act was intended to, the mischief rule was used to find the
defendant guilty of soliciting in public view. However, this again expands the scope of the judge beyond
interpreting what is already on the statute and leaves room for uncertainty as each judge may have
different understandings. However, this situation can be rectified with the use of intrinsic and extrinsic
aids to clarify Parliament’s intention. For example, short titles, headings and schedules are intrinsic aids
that may be consulted, while Law Reform Reports, other Acts of Parliament and Hansard, which is the
record of Parliamentary debates are extrinsic aids that may clarify the mischief Parliament intended to
remedy.

Additionally, judges may choose to use a non-traditional approach such as the purposive approach
which aims to give effect to the intent of an Act, as seen in Magor and St Mellons v Newport Group.
Additionally, in Pepper v Hart, it was held that Hansard, the record of Parliamentary debates could be
consulted for interpretation so the court could see the direct reasoning behind the statute and look to
the spirit of the law. The Unified Context Approach, which is a guide on which rule or approach to use,
and the Compatibility Approach, which is a guide to interpretation that is in line with the European
convention on Human Rights, may also be used.

To conclude, statutory interpretation is a key function of the judiciary which is supposed to close the
loopholes and gaps that statutes could not provide for. To aid judges in this task, extrinsic aids, or aids to
interpretation outside the statute itself may be consulted, such as previous Acts of Parliament,
dictionaries of the time, case law and Hansard, or the record of Parliamentary debates, can be
considered.

JUDICIAL PRECEDENT

• The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on stare decisis. That is the standing by of previous
decisions. Once a point of law has been decided in a particular case, that law must be applied in all
future cases containing the same material facts. It is the most antiquate sours of law. It ensures
certainty and consistency in law. The decision or judgement of a judge may fall into two parts: the ratio
decidendi (reason for the decision) and obiter dictum (something said by the way).

• RATIO DECIDENDI - The ratio decidendi of a case is the principle of law on which a decision is based.
When a judge delivers judgement in a case he outlines the facts which he finds have been proved on the
evidence. Then he applies the law to those facts and arrives at a decision, for which he gives the reason
(ratio decidendi). There may be more than one ratio in one case.

• OBITER DICTUM - The judge may go on to speculate about what his decision would or might have
been if the facts of the case had been different. This is an obiter dictum

Types of precedents;

Binding precedent. • The binding part of a judicial decision is the ratio decidendi and has to be followed
in latter cases of similar facts this is called Binding precedent . Persuasive precedents. • An obiter
dictum is not binding in later cases because it was not strictly relevant to the matter in issue in the
original case. However, an obiter dictum may be of persuasive (as opposed to binding) authority in later
cases. Hence these are called persuasive precedents. Original precedent • Original precedent means a
precedent that creates and applies a new legal rule. An original precedent is made when there is no
previous judicial decision on a point of law

Operation of doctrine of precedent and the hierarchy of courts in UK

Civil Cases • The Supreme Court (Earlier known as House of Lords) • Court of Appeal (Civil Division) •
High Court • County Court • (Magistrates Court)

Criminal Cases • The Supreme Court • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) • High Court • Crown Court •
Magistrates’ Court

Supreme Court (House of Lords) • The House of Lords was bound by its own previous decisions until
1966 when Lord Gardiner LC announced a change of practice. The Practice Statement stated that
although the House of Lords would treat its decisions as normally binding it would depart from these
when it appeared right to do so. This power has been used sparingly. • A decision of the House of Lords
binds all lower courts.

COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) • The Court of Appeal is bound by decisions of the House of Lords
even if it considers them to be wrong. • In Young v Bristol Aero plane Co Ltd , the Court of Appeal held
that it was not bound by its own previous decisions subject to certain exceptions. • Decisions of the
Court of Appeal itself are binding on the High Court and the county courts.

COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION) • In principle there is no difference in the application of stare
decisis in the civil and criminal divisions of the Court of Appeal. • In practice, however, in addition to the
Young exceptions, because a person's liberty may be at stake, precedent is not followed as rigidly in the
criminal division. In R v Taylor, the Court of Appeal held that in 'questions involving the liberty of the
subject' if a full court considered that 'the law has either been misapplied or misunderstood' then it
must reconsider the earlier decision.

THE HIGH COURT • The High Court is bound by the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords but is not
bound by other High Court decisions. • However, they are of strong persuasive authority in the High
Court and are usually followed. • Decisions of individual High Court judges are binding on the county
courts. • A Divisional Court is bound by the House of Lords and the Court of Appeal and normally follows
a previous decision of another Divisional Court.

CROWN COURTS • Decisions made on points of law by judges sitting at the Crown Court are not binding,
though they are of persuasive authority. • Therefore, there is no obligation on other Crown Court judges
to follow them. • These courts are bound by all courts above them.

COUNTY COURTS AND MAGISTRATES' COURTS • The decisions of these courts are not binding. They are
rarely important in law and are not usually reported in the law reports. • They are however bound by all
courts above them.

Factors causing rigidity

• Conservative attitude of the judges at the apex (highest) court. Evident from scarce use of practice
statement. First major use in 1972 in Harrington v British Railway • Since absolute authority is with the
apex court takes a tot of time to appeal and change the precedent. • More stress is laid on certainty
rather than flexibility. • Unavailability of prospective overruling unlike in USA hence judges hesitant to
create “Dogs Law” like in the case of RvR. • No regard for academic criticism precedents are followed
rigidly. • Irrespective of the strength of majority deciding a case once a precedent has to be followed.

Factors causing flexibility:

• Practice statement which allows the supreme Court not to follow its own decisions. • First major use in
1972 in Harrington v British Railway • Other major uses; i. R v G & R overruled MPC v Caldwell in
relation to the test of recklessness applicable for criminal damage ii. Pepper v Hart overruled Davis v
Johnson regarding the use of Hansard as an aid to statutory interpretation. • Following are the three
exceptions: i. Where its own previous decisions conflict, the Court of Appeal must decide which to
follow and which to reject. ii. The Court of Appeal must refuse to follow a decision of its own which
cannot stand with a decision of the House of Lords even though its decision has not been expressly
overruled by the House of Lords. iii. The Court of Appeal need not follow a decision of its own if satisfied
that it was given per incuriam (literally, by carelessness or mistake).

• DISTINGUISHING Distinguishing a case on its facts, or on the point of law involved, is a device used by
judges usually in order to avoid the consequences of an earlier inconvenient decision which is, in strict
practice, binding on them. Balfour v Balfour (1919) and Merritt v Merritt

• OVERRULING A higher court can overrule a decision made in an earlier case by a lower court e.g The
Court of Appeal can overrule an earlier High Court decision.R v Kingston • Overruling can occur if the
previous court did not correctly apply the law, or because the later court considers that the rule of law
contained in the previous ratio decidendi is no longer desirable.

• REVERSING Reversing is the overturning on appeal by a higher court, of the decision of the court
below that hearing the appeal. The appeal court will then substitute its own decision.

ADVANTAGES:

There is certainty in the law. By looking at existing precedents it is possible to forecast what a decision
will be and plan accordingly. ii. There is uniformity in the law. Similar cases will be treated in the same
way. This is important to give the system a sense of justice and to make the system acceptable to the
public. iii. Judicial precedent is flexible. There are a number of ways to avoid precedents and this
enables the system to change and to adapt to new situations. iv. Judicial precedent is practical in nature.
It is based on real facts, unlike legislation. v. Judicial precedent is detailed. There is a wealth of cases to
which to refer.

DISADVANTAGES:

i. Difficulties can arise in deciding what the ratio decidendi is, particularly if there are a number of
reasons. ii. There may be a considerable wait for a case to come to court for a point to be decided. iii.
Cases can easily be distinguished on their facts to avoid following an inconvenient precedent. iv. There is
far too much case law and it is too complex.

Conclusion: • It ensures certainty and hence fairness is maintained. • Doctrine of stare decisis creates a
fine balance between flexibility, development and certainty which is essential for the proper functioning
of a legal system. • The incremental development of law in UK is perfectly mirrored by the doctrine of
stare decisis. • The progressive use of practice statement in the recent years has ensured that the law
remains at par with other developments within UK.

POLICE POWERS

The powers of the police are contained within the Police and Criminal evidence Act (PACE) 1984 to
balance the powers between the police and individual citizens. This was to ensure that the police had
enough power to do their job properly while protecting the rights of innocent people. However, there
have been several miscarriages of justice due to poor police conduct that have led to events such as the
wrongful imprisonment of the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six. Such events are not only local to
the UK but also abroad in places such as the United States which have led to movements such as Black
Lives Matter. Thus, it is more important than ever for the actual powers granted in PACE and other
legislation to be discussed and evaluated on their effectiveness, which will be done in the following
paragraphs. The powers to stop and search under PACE are listed in Sections 1-7 and Code of Practice A.
Section 1 of PACE states that the police can stop and search people and vehicles in public spaces,
meaning in the street but also areas like car parks and privately owned outdoor areas if the suspect
likely does not live there. However, to use this power there must be reasonable grounds for suspicion
the suspect possesses prohibited or stolen goods according to Section 1(3). A more detailed guideline is
found in Code of Practice A, paragraph 2.2B: the police should not base their suspicions on a person’s
characteristics alone. Before searching under these powers, the police must identify themselves, their
police station and the reasons for the search according to Section 2 of PACE. If not in uniform,
documentary evidence is required to be shown according to Section 2(3). This was held in the cases R v
Osman. Reasonable force can be used during a search according to Section 117, but the police can only
require a suspect to remove their outer jacket, coat and gloves in public according to Section 2(9). If any
stolen or prohibited articles are found, they may be seized under Section 1(6). In addition to the above
powers, certain statutes give additional powers to stop and search such as the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
and Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Road checks may also be done if a
police officer rank superintendent or above authorises it and a person who has committed an indictable
offense is in the area according to Section 4 of PACE. Next, the police can search a premises if a warrant
has been issued by a magistrate under Section 8 of PACE. Section 16 and Code B of PACE state that the
police must identify themselves, show the warrant to the occupiers at the premises and give them a
copy of the warrant. However this may be done not before entry but only before the search as seen in R
v Longman. In some situations, the police may search premises without a warrant to arrest someone in
an arrest warrant or to recapture an escaped prisoner as stated in Section 17 of PACE. They can enter
places controlled by someone who has just been arrested or where they were present at the time of
arrest according to Section 18 and 32 of PACE respectively. In addition, the police have a common law
right to enter even private property to prevent a breach of the peace. Moving on to the powers of
arrest, Section 24 of PACE, now amended by the Section 110 of the Serious Organized Crime and Police
Act 2005, grants police the power to make arrests without a warrant if they know or reasonably suspect
someone has committed, is committing or is about to commit any offence. They are allowed to use
reasonable force according to Section 117 of PACE and Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967. However,
the arrest must be in order to obtain the person’s name or address, to prevent the person from causing
injury or damage to property, to protect vulnerable persons or to prevent the person from disappearing
according to Section 24(4) of PACE. Other procedure include needing to state the reason of arrest
according to paragraph 2.2 of Code G, which should be done in simple, non-technical language as seen
by Taylor v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police and even if it is obvious, as seen in Christie v
Leachinsky. Additionally, there exists a common law right to arrest where there has been or is likely to
be a ‘breach of the peace’. Of course, the police can also obtain an arrest warrant issued under Section 1
of the Magistrates’ Court Act for a named person. After a person has been arrested, the police have
powers of detention as seen in sections 33 to 46 of PACE as amended by the Criminal Justice and Public
Order Act and Code of Practice C. The general rule is that the police can detain someone for up to 24
hours. If arrested for an indictable offense an extra 12 hours can be authorized by a police officer of rank
superintendent and above. For detention of up to 96 hours, an application to the Magistrates Courts is
required, but the Terrorism Act 200 allows terrorist suspects to be detained for up to 14 days before
charge. While detained, the police may question the detained person, but all interviews are tape-
recorded and suspects cautioned as required by Code E. After charged, the police may interview the
person but only if necessary. Lastly, while the police has no automatic right to search people in
detention, a non intimate search may be authorized by the custody officer to record everything present
on a person. Strip searches may be done when it is needed to remove an article the suspect is not
allowed to keep, but it can only be done in private and by an officer of the same sex. High ranking
officers may also authorize intimate searches but only to search for Class A drugs or items that may
cause injury. The police also may take fingerprints and non-intimate body samples without the person’s
consent. Intimate samples may be taken by a medical professional. However, this is only done when
there is reasonable reasons to suspect involvement in a recordable crime. These samples may be kept
for up to 3 years according to the Protection of Freedoms Act or indefinitely if the person has been
previously convicted. In conclusion, while the use of police powers have yielded results in the
prevention of crime, there is always room for improvement to better protect civil rights. Suggestions for
law reform such as making breaches of the Codes of Practice legally punishable rather than just resulting
in disciplinary procedures all have the potential to help the police improve their conduct. Such reform,
as well as the introduction of the Human Rights Act 1998 can help the police find a better balance
between maintaining civil rights and the reduction of crime

LEGAL PROFESSIONALS

Barristers and solicitors  Division into two separate professions  Advocacy vs general legal advice 
Very different business structures  Increased cross-over between professions  Dismantling monopolies

–Solicitor advocates –Direct-access barristers –New types of 'lawyer'

Training and entry: solicitors Have privileges in conducting litigation on another’s behalf, that barristers
do not.  Current system: - Legal knowledge from a 'qualifying' law degree or any degree plus the
graduate diploma in law - Practical and vocational knowledge and skills from the Legal Practice Course -
Clinical skills from a training contract (2 years, paid)  From 2020: - Any degree, followed by stage 1 of
Solicitors Qualifying Exam - 24 months of qualifying practical experience followed by stage two the SQE

Training and entry : Barristers – self employed

 Current system: - Legal knowledge from a 'qualifying' law degree or any degree plus the graduate
diploma in law - Practical and vocational knowledge and skills from the Bar Professional Training Course
- Clinical skills from a pupillage (12 months; some pay in first 6 months, fee earning in second)

 Future changes? - The Bar intends to retain the three stages of training - Consultation on the future of
the BPTC

access and diversity  Bottlenecks in the progression from student to professional - 15,000 graduated
from law degrees in 2015 - 6,000 new solicitors admitted in 2015 - 270 new barristers gained tenancy in
2012  Significant proportion of new solicitors are women but only 33% of partners of law firms are
women  Over 15% of practicing solicitors are Black, Asian, or minority ethnic

Over a third of practicing barristers are women, and 12% are BAME  The number of women QCs (senior
barristers) is slowly increasing but still far fewer than half new QCs are women  Cost of training acts as
an additional bar to access to the professions - Over half of partners at the top law firms are Oxford or
Cambridge graduates

organization and regulation  Solicitors mainly form firms, using partnerships and limited liability
partnerships. - Associate solicitors are employed, partners part-own the firm - Regulated by the
Solicitors' Regulation Authority  Barristers are (mainly) self-employed, but work together in chambers
sharing the costs of premises and support staff - Regulated by the Bar Standards Board  Legal
Executives are employed by firms of solicitors, performing some specialised legal tasks - Regulated by
Chartered Institute of Legal Executives - Legal Executives can choose to go on to qualify as solicitors 
'Paralegal' is a catch-all term for a wide range of practitioners who perform legal services which aren't
reserved to the regulated professions

changes to the professions  Traditional views of professions - Self-regulating, self-selecting - Consumer

protection through commitment to public service, professional standards and limited access  Moves
against monopolies and anti-competitive practices - Consumer protection - and reduced costs to
consumers - through competition  Reduction in monopolies - Conveyancing - Licensed conveyancers -
Direct access to barristers - Solicitor advocates  'Alternative business structures' - Introduce non-lawyer
ownership of legal service providers - New regulators of legal services

LAY PERSONNEL

The Legal System (Criminal Courts and Lay Personnel)

SUMMARY OFFENCES are MINOR offences tried at the magistrates court. assault, battery, criminal
damage. TRIABLE EITHER WAY OFFENCES are MODERATE crimes and can be tried at either magistrates
or crown court. burgulary, fraud, theft. INDICTABLE OFFENCES are serious offences tried at the crown
court. arson, murder, blackmail.

Criminal appeals MAGISTRATES COURT – can challenge to crown and prosecution can appeal to qbdc.
this is an automatic right to appeal as a defendant against a sentence or conviction. CROWN COURT –
can challenge to court of appeal. you would need leave to appeal to challenge to court of appeal with
“new and compelling evidence”. COURT OF APPEAL – can challenge to supreme court. you can only
challenge on points of law in matters of general public importance. it is available to the prosecution and
the defence. SUPREME COURT – can not be challenged.

Role and powers of magistrates

MAGISTRATES - are lay people who are volunteering - sit as a bench of three (one chairman and two
wingers) - can decide whether to grant bail. - can decide if a defendant is guilty or not - can give a
custodial sentence for up to 12 months for 2 offences.

The role of jurors jury can be anyone aged 18-70. they are selected completely at random, but you
cannot be a part of the jury if you are in prison, on bail, or you are doing community serivce. once the
jury are at court, 15 names are chosen randomly to go into the court then, 12 people are called to be
part of the jury. during a trial, the jury must listen to evidence and make notes.

after a trial, they must deliberate their decisions to decide whether they think the defendant is guilty.
the verdict can be unanimous (everyone agrees on the same verdict) or majority (10-2 or 11-1). if there
are any less votes than 10-2 after a long period, then the defendant will be let free and they will be
considered not guilty.

Advantages of the jury - juries are independent of legal profession - this gives the defendant greater
confidence in the legal system as they are being judged by their peers. - juries are representative of
society - they will understand certain situations that ordinary people are in. - juries can reach a verdict
according to conscious rather than law. - this also means that they cannot be punished for their verdict.
- R V KRONLID – Admitted she caused damage to fighter jet because she thought it was going to bomb
another country - R V PONTING – Leaked information to newspapers about sinking of The Belgrano.

Disadvantages of the jury - juries can sometimes not know what to do r v price – the jury were sending
notes to the judge asking what to do. - juries have to deal with serious cases JAMES BULGER – the jury
had to receive counselling which costs taxpayers money. - juries can be influenced by the media. AN
HUNTLEY – The jury already decided he was guilty before the trial

AIMS OF SENTENCING –

protect society custodial sentences governed by criminal justices act 2003.

custodial sentences are only used if the offence is so serious that custodial sentencing can be justified
e.g. mandatory life sentence for murder. - punish fines magistrates can give unlimited fines for any type
of offence e.g. truancy and drink driving. –

rehabilitate community sentences created by Criminal Justices Act 2003. there can be “mix and match”
requirements e.g. unpaid work, anger management and curfew. –

DETER CHARGE :

absolute discharge is a formal telling off and there is no penalty imposed.

conditional discharge is when you are discharged on the condition that you do not reoffend, otherwise
you will sentenced for both e.g. minor crimes