Potential Of Law Making

Question 1

What happened in London street tramways?

Answer 1

1898-London st tramways HOL decided it would always follow its own previous decisions; to maintain certainty

Question 2

What was the problem with what was decided in London street tramways?

Answer 2

The system was too rigid and the law would become unchanging.
Bad law would become embedded

Question 3

What was introduced in 1966?

Answer 3

The practice statement

Question 4

What does the practice statement allow?

Answer 4

The HOL/ UKSC (only) can over rule its own previous decisions where it appeared right to do so.

Question 5

When has the practice statement been used?

Answer 5

• Conway V Rimmer (1968) OR Duncan V Camal
• Herrington V BRB (1972) OR Addie V Dumbreck
• Milangoes V George frank (1976) OR Havana
• shivpuri (1986) OR Anderton V Ryan
• R V Howe (1987) OR Lynch

Question 6

What are the criticisms of the practice statement?

Answer 6

• The first use wasn’t until 1968 (Conway V Rimmer)
• the first major use was in Herrington v brb 1972
• wasn’t used in criminal case until 1986 R V Shivpuri
• pepper V hart OR Davis v Johnson regarding Hansard

Question 7

What powers to overrule does the court of appeal have?

Answer 7

The practice statement does not apply to the Cof A. The two divisions of the CofA do not bind each other but they may be persuaded.

Question 8

What did young v bristole aeroplane (1944) case allow?

Answer 8

3 circumstances where the CofA was not bound by its own previous decisions.

Question 9

What were the circumstances outlined in young v bristol aeroplane?

Answer 9

1. Where a previous decisions in the CofA has been OR by UKSC they must follow decision of UKSC
2. If there are two conflicting decisions CofA has discretion to chose
3. If the decision is made per incuriam

Question 10

What additional powers to overrule does CofA have (other than those outlined in young v Bristol aeroplane)?

Answer 10

They can overrule where it appears the law has been misapplied or misunderstood, R V Taylor
Any decision that conflicts with human rights act (terrorism act)

Question 11

What does the practice statement allow?

Answer 11

The HOL/ UKSC (only) can over rule its own previous decisions where it appeared right to do so.

Question 12

When has the practice statement been used?

Answer 12

• Conway V Rimmer (1968) OR Duncan V Camal
• Herrington V BRB (1972) OR Addie V Dumbreck
• Milangoes V George frank (1976) OR Havana
• shivpuri (1986) OR Anderton V Ryan
• R V Howe (1987) OR Lynch

Question 13

What are the criticisms of the practice statement?

Answer 13

• The first use wasn’t until 1968 (Conway V Rimmer)
• the first major use was in Herrington v brb 1972
• wasn’t used in criminal case until 1986 R V Shivpuri
• pepper V hart OR Davis v Johnson regarding Hansard

Question 14

What powers to overrule does the court of appeal have?

Answer 14

The practice statement does not apply to the Cof A. The two divisions of the CofA do not bind each other but they may be persuaded.

Question 15

What did young v bristole aeroplane (1944) case allow?

Answer 15

3 circumstances where the CofA was not bound by its own previous decisions.

Question 16

What were the circumstances outlined in young v bristol aeroplane?

Answer 16

1. Where a previous decisions in the CofA has been OR by UKSC they must follow decision of UKSC
2. If there are two conflicting decisions CofA has discretion to chose
3. If the decision is made per incuriam

Question 17

What additional powers to overrule does CofA have (other than those outlined in young v Bristol aeroplane)?

Answer 17

They can overrule where it appears the law has been misapplied or misunderstood, R V Taylor
Any decision that conflicts with human rights act (terrorism act)

Question 18

What are the arguments in favour of the CofA extending their powers?

Answer 18

• often CofA is final appeal court for most cases. If there is an error could take longer to be dealt with bad law embedded RVR
• CofA deals with majority of appeals has lots of experience, broader range of expertise
• fewer unnecessary appeals
• faster to give the criminal division more power

Question 19

What are the arguments in against the CofA extending their powers?

Answer 19

• there could be a reluctance to use their power shown by HOL and practice statement
• giving CofA more power would reduce certainty, would be two conflicting decisions for lower courts to chose from
• undermine the supremacy of UKSC