LAW405 AS1 Law and the Legal System Assignment Sample

• Type Assignment
• Downloads555
• Pages9
• Words2181

Task 1: Report

This report explores the vital role of lay magistrates within the English justice system, detailing their responsibilities, appointment process, and the extent to which they reflect the diversity of society. It highlights how lay magistrates contribute to fair and community-driven justice despite ongoing challenges in representation. Prepared as a professional academic sample, this section serves as valuable Assignment Help material for students studying law and criminal justice systems.

LAW405 AS1 Law and the Legal System Assignment Sample

Liked This Sample? Hire Me Now

Richard Brown 8 Years | LLM

1.0 Introduction

Lay magistrates have the important function in the system of justice of England as they receive a large number of less serious criminal offenses. This paper will primarily focus to discuss their roles, how they are selected, and finally the degree to which they are diverse to represent society. This paper demonstrates that to ascertain the value of lay magistrates it is important to understand how they function in the justice system and whether they meet the normative criteria.

2.0 Role of Parliament and Judiciary

“Justices of the Peace” or “lay magistrates” are people from the community that work voluntarily in the “Magistrates’ Courts”. These people lack legal education but receive training for them to execute their tasks. Their main duty is to make decisions related to less severe criminal cases such as affordable assaults and thefts cases, and public nuisances among others[1]. Lay magistrates are responsible for dealing with about 90% of all criminal cases in England and Wales meaning that the first tier courts are very efficient in dealing with all cases.

The hearing civil cases they also issue warrants for search and arrest, they grant bails and preside over preliminary hearings and trials of other major crimes. They also are allowed to take cases related to families and youths together with other colleagues, who are specially trained. They are kept informed of the cases, and they decide on aspects concerning the case, the legal consultants who sit in the courts[2]. This is helpful as it is a community participation model of early forms of lay magistrates which provide an additional method of law.

3.0 Appointment Process of Lay Magistrates

The procedure of the selection of lay magistrates enables them to be able to discharge their duties fairly and impartially but at the same time they represent the people. Applicants must be citizens of the United States, aged from eighteen to seventy, and have moral character, sound judgment and dedication to serving the public. There are no legal educational or experience requirements, but all candidates must meet key competencies such as communication and interpersonal skills, and team working.

The process of selection is properly structured and ranges from the online application form to the initial interview by the local “Advisory Committees”[3]. The selection is done by a panel of assessors of both the magistrate and the non-magistrate that assess the candidate against the competencies outlined for the position. Those who pass the initial selection are later offered an interview with a second round that involves solving several role plays with the purpose of ascertaining their decision making capacity.

Lay magistrates once appointed are required by law to undertake training offered by the “Judicial College”. This training aims at preparing the trainee for his or her responsibilities through standard courtroom procedures, legal principles, evidence laws, legal ethics and professionalism[4]. This ensures that standards of judicial performance are kept high through what is provided for under training and appraisals. The policy encourages the citizens to be involved in delivery of justice hence maintaining their trust and also exercising the public values in the society.

4.0 Representation of Society 

In the current and past years, there have been constantly raised concerns as to whether the seven-member lay magistrate bench offers true and efficient representation of the vast society. The majority of appointing magistrates has been white, middle aged, and of a professional working background thus their ability to relate to all parties in a society. The current statistics provided by the “Magistrates’ Association reveal an inappropriate scenario. Only 13% of lay magistrates are first-generation individuals of color, and fewer than 5% were born in or after 1981[5]. This demographic distribution shows that “NEMS” is poorly presented in terms of age and ethnic minorities compared to the general population.

They continue to say that this position may create a bias within the jury, whether realized or not, more so where the defendant comes from a minority group. Moreover, by virtue of being positions that do not attract any remuneration and are considered voluntary positions, such positions are likely to be occupied by persons from lower socio-economic backgrounds because they may not be able to afford the time to perform those duties[6]. The transparent attempts at diversification of the magistracy are attempted, including specific recruitment drives and community engagement programmers, and progress is still slow. However, such difficulties still allow participation of the lay magistrates as an important link between the community and justice system[7]. However, for lay magistrates, to reflect the society adequately, there is also a need for more aggressive policies that would encourage people of the society of today to join this service.

5.0 Conclusion

In the above report the entire content is to provide that lay magistrates are the main dispensers of justice for communities and although the current processes of the commission raises some concerns on the representativeness of the commission. They make public involvement in the judiciary possible, there are conspicuous absences of diversity. These challenges is important for the health of the institutions and achieving a higher level of justice and social justice.

Task 2: Essay

1.0 Introduction

This entire essay primarily focuses on an analysis of the links between parliamentary legislation and the law as interpreted and applied by the courts in the UK. While the Parliament is to make the laws, the judiciary is supposed to implement them or give them a meaning. Issues arise thus does the exercise of judicial discretion achieved through the interpretation of legislation compromise the doctrine of the separation of powers? As a result of the mentioned approach, this essay seeks to analyze how statutory interpretation distorts parliamentary sovereignty by altering the law to meaning beyond that which has been legislated by parliament.

2.0 Role of Parliament and Judiciary

The supreme legislative body of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, today’s topic entitled Parliament of the United Kingdom is the only body capable of making, altering or repealing laws. According to this principle of parliamentary sovereignty, the laws made by the Parliament cannot be blunted or frustrated by any other authority[8]. Courts can neither challenge the validity of legislation passed by the country’s parliament but only given the responsibility of interpreting laws and where there are ambiguities, the courts are expected to define it[9]. The matter of statutory interpretation assumes importance most often in those situations where the statutes themselves are ambiguous or susceptible to more than one construction. Although this interpretative function is essential in the running of justice, a controversy arises when a judge seems to amend the literal meaning of Parliament.

3.0 Statutory Interpretation

The concept of statutory interpretation allows judges to address doubts in the lawmaking process. Meaning of New Words: Judges are directed to take words in its dictionary definition, as in “Fisher v Bell (1961)”, where a shop display was not held to be an offer for sale[10]. However, this approach leads to mechanistic results; the “Golden Rule” is then used to allow alteration if interpretation is literal then the outcome is absurd as seen in “Adler v George (1964)”.

The “Mischief Rule” which emanates from “Heydon’s Case as early as 1584” centers on what the statute in question seeks to solve. For example, in “Smith v Hughes (1960)”, it was relied on to convict prostitutes operating from private places which could be seen by the public hence the legislative aim to ban street prostitution[11]. The “Purposive Approach” is used to for beyond the literal reading of the word to include the Parliament more often in cases dealing with the EU or human rights law, For example, In “Pepper v Hart 1993” this approach was used to allow the use of Hansard in order to determine the intent of the legislation.

4.0 Judicial Discretion vs. Separation of Powers

The role of judicial preference in statute primarily covers all kinds of potential gaps where all the legislation is not properly clear where all the judiciary are also involved in the actual interpretation. However, it has the disadvantage of causing legal and policy questions as to how this discretion threatens the constitutional principle of the separation of powers since it seeks to prevent one branch of government from dominating the other[12]. Opponents state that when the judges make an application of statutes other than their literal sense, then they infringe on the prerogative of Parliament, hence the contentious doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. For instance, the “R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms (2000)”, showed activism because the courts placed basic liberties above laws[13]. The judiciary’s liberation also assures the proper balance on the several branches such as, “R (Miller) v The Prime Minister (2019)”.

5.0 Conclusion

In the above essay the entire content is primarily focused on the judicial interpretation which is one of the most important legislation to implement all kinds of flexibility in several diverse cases, and it is also influencing the legislative authority.

Reference List

Journals

• Allister R, ‘Abdi and Nadarajah v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] EWCA Civ 1363’ in Adams v Scottish Ministers 2004 SC 665 (IH (2 Div)); affirming in part 2003 SC 171; 2003 SLT 366.
• Bárd P, ‘In Courts We Trust, or Should We? Judicial Independence as the Precondition for the Effectiveness of EU Law’ (2021) 27(1-3) European Law Journal 185.
• Gilani SRS, Al Matrooshi AM and Awan AF, ‘An In-depth Analysis of the Human Rights Act of 1998 and the Bill of Human Rights UK: Examining the Advantages and Disadvantages’ (2024) 4(1) Current Trends in Law and Society 110.
• Huang DK, Yusingco MH and Zibi P, ‘Constitutional Amending Powers in the Philippines and Cameroon: A Comparison with British and German Models’ (2022) 17 Journal of Comparative Law 21.
• Joseph PA, ‘The Dance of Legislation: Why Parliamentary Sovereignty is Not a Meaningful Public Law Metric’ (2023) 54 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 205.
• Mak C, Van Duin J and Burgers L, ‘Judges in Utopia: The Transformative Role of the Judiciary in European Private Law’ (2020) 28(4) European Review of Private Law.
• Morón L, ‘Presumptions of Legislative Intent in R (Coughlan) v Minister for the Cabinet Office’ (2023) 86(3) The Modern Law Review 801.
• Pech L and Kochenov D, Respect for the Rule of Law in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice: A Casebook Overview of Key Judgments Since the Portuguese Judges Case (SIEPS, Stockholm, 2021).
• Pech L, ‘Dealing with “Fake Judges” under EU Law: Poland as a Case Study in Light of the Court of Justice’s Ruling of 26 March 2020 in Simpson and HG’ (2020).
• Riaz A, ‘Sections 3 and 4 of the Human Rights Act and Their Impact on the United Kingdom's Constitutional Arrangements’ (2021) Queen Mary Law Journal 133.
• Spano R, ‘The Rule of Law as the Lodestar of the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court and the Independence of the Judiciary’ (2021) 27(1-3) European Law Journal 211.
• Van Dijk F, Perceptions of the Independence of Judges in Europe: Congruence of Society and Judiciary (Springer Nature, 2021).
• Welsh L, Access to Justice in Magistrates' Courts: A Study of Defendant Marginalisation (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2022).
• Van Dijk F, Perceptions of the Independence of Judges in Europe: Congruence of Society and Judiciary (Springer Nature, 2021).
• Pech L and Kochenov D, Respect for the Rule of Law in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice: A Casebook Overview of Key Judgments Since the Portuguese Judges Case (SIEPS, Stockholm, 2021).
• Pech L, ‘Dealing with “Fake Judges” under EU Law: Poland as a Case Study in Light of the Court of Justice’s Ruling of 26 March 2020 in Simpson and HG’ (2020).
• Mak C, Van Duin J and Burgers L, ‘Judges in Utopia: The Transformative Role of the Judiciary in European Private Law’ (2020) 28(4) European Review of Private Law.
• Spano R, ‘The Rule of Law as the Lodestar of the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court and the Independence of the Judiciary’ (2021) 27(1-3) European Law Journal 211.
• Gilani SRS, Al Matrooshi AM and Awan AF, ‘An In-depth Analysis of the Human Rights Act of 1998 and the Bill of Human Rights UK: Examining the Advantages and Disadvantages’ (2024) 4(1) Current Trends in Law and Society 110.
• Bárd P, ‘In Courts We Trust, or Should We? Judicial Independence as the Precondition for the Effectiveness of EU Law’ (2021) 27(1-3) European Law Journal 185.
• Joseph PA, ‘The Dance of Legislation: Why Parliamentary Sovereignty is Not a Meaningful Public Law Metric’ (2023) 54 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 205.
• Huang DK, Yusingco MH and Zibi P, ‘Constitutional Amending Powers in the Philippines and Cameroon: A Comparison with British and German Models’ (2022) 17 Journal of Comparative Law 21.
• Morón L, ‘Presumptions of Legislative Intent in R (Coughlan) v Minister for the Cabinet Office’ (2023) 86(3) The Modern Law Review 801.
• Allister R, ‘Abdi and Nadarajah v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] EWCA Civ 1363’ in Adams v Scottish Ministers 2004 SC 665 (IH (2 Div)); affirming in part 2003 SC 171; 2003 SLT 366.
• Riaz A, ‘Sections 3 and 4 of the Human Rights Act and Their Impact on the United Kingdom's Constitutional Arrangements’ (2021) Queen Mary Law Journal 133.