AC1.1: processes used for law-making

AC1.1: processes used for law-making

1. 1. Government processes

   • 1. Green Paper = a new law is proposed + is published for public consultation
     • 2. White Paper = more detailed plan that re-evaluates aims of law/points made from consultation considered
       • 3. goes to Parliament (House of Commons [financial laws have to start here], House of Lords + monarch)/becomes a bill here
         • 4. 1st reading = name of bill/main aims read out + formal vote occurs
           • 5. 2nd reading = main debate takes place + another vote
             • 6. Committee stage = chosen group of representatives look at bill to address issues/suggest amendments
               • 7. Report stage = Committee report back to the full House + vote on proposed amendments occurs
                 • 8. 3rd reading = final vote on bill + all stages above repeated in other House (can go back and forth between houses (ping pong))
                   • 9. Royal Assent = monarch signs bill to pass it as a law + becomes an Act of Parliament - can't be refused as is a symbolic act

2. 2. Judicial processes

   • 1. Judicial Precedent
     • = law made by judges in courts
       • = when case appears before them, they must make a judgement which forms law
         • = law must be followed in future cases that are similar
     • eg: Donoghue vs Stevenson (1932) = D drank bottle of ginger beer w remains of a decomposing snail - became ill and sued manufacturer - won - 'neighbour principle' formed - founded modern law of negligence
       • eg: Daniels vs White (1938) = claimant bought lemonade that had corrosive metal in - case above used when suing for compensation - sufficiently similar to be classed as process of precedent
     • laws applied consistently as is must be common in all cases - 'common law'
       • hierarchy of courts - lower eg: magistrates must abide by decisions from higher courts
         • higher courts eg: supreme court can overrule/distinguish from mast decisions in some cases
           • no precedent = judge must make decision + provide original precedent
   • 2. Statutory interpretation
     • = judges in superior courts eg: court of appeal/supreme court sometimes called to interpret words + phrases within a certain act or law
       • = eg: Whiteley vs Chappell (1868) = defendant charged with impersonating someone entitled to vote who had died - court held defendant as not guilty since a dead person is not 'entitled to vote'
     • rules to help interpretation:
       • 1. Literal Rule = judges can use everyday meanings of words in a statute (written) law, but words have various meanings (eg: R vs Maginnis 1987 - case involving illegal drugs - different meanings found for 'supply'
         • 2. Golden Rule = literal rule can sometimes lead to an absurd result - judge can use common sense to decide - eg: under Official Secrets Act 1920 - an offence to obstruct Her Majesty's Forces in the vicinity of a prohibited place, such as a naval base - eg: Adler vs George 1964 = Adler stated he had not broken law as he was not literally in the vicinity of a prohibited place but was actually in it = court chose to apply golden rule to avoid absurd result + Adler was convicted