AOS1 - Relationship between Parliament and the Courts

Question 1

Statutory interpretation

Answer 1

• Judges are often called upon to interpret the meaning of words in a statute when applying it to a case before the court
• Relationship:
  
  • Parliament makes laws
  • Courts apply meaning to those laws

Question 2

Codification (of common law)

Answer 2

• As the supreme law-making body, parliament can make legislation that codifies (confirms) precedents set by the court
• Relationship:
  
  • Courts resolve disputes (usually, in this case, creating a precedent)
  • Parliament recognises (likes) the outcome and then codifies it into laws

Question 3

Abrogation (of common law)

Answer 3

• As the supreme law-making body, parliament can make legislation that abrogates (abolishes) a common law principle or precedent
• Why?
  
  • Statute is interpreted in a way that does not align with parliament’s intent or reflect the current meaning of the act
  • Precedent is created or applied that parliament does not agree with
• Relationship:
  
  • Courts resolve disputes (creating (potentially) a precedent)
  • Parliament rejects (dislikes) and creates an Act to oppose the outcome

Question 4

Ability of courts to influence parliament

Answer 4

• In their judgments, courts may influence parliament to change the law by commenting on the need for reform
• Why?
  
  • Courts are bound by unjust or outdated precedent
  • Judges may believe parliament is in a better position to change the law
• Relationship:
  
  • The court recognises the decision could be changed more effectively by parliament, as well as not wanting to change old, established precedent
  • Parliament makes the decision on whether to accept the influence or not