Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … English Legal System and the European Courts
The English Legal System is the product of an evolution of a body of laws that has been developed since the 11th century to present day. This body of law includes many organs or institutions that have been mimicked in other nations' legal systems, including the United States. The key legal institutions that make up the English Legal System include Parliament, the Courts, and the Executive institution, which is made up from the largest party in the House of Commons. (Gillespie, A., 2010) These three individual organs of the legal system are balanced against each other, similar to the way that the Judicial, Executive, and Legislative branches are in U.S. law. However, in the English Legal System, the Parliament wields the legislative power under an unwritten British Constitution. Also, the British did not believe in complete separation of powers like the framers of the U.S. Constitution did.
Parliament is responsible for introducing and passing laws, just as the U.S. legislative branch is. Parliament is made up of two different houses or groups. The lower house is called the House of Parliament where members are directly elected. The upper house is called the House of Lords which grants Parliamentary positions to people based upon birthright and heritage (Wilson, et. al., 2001). However, in the late 1990's, most of these birthright positions were eliminated in favor of a primarily popularly-elected Parliament (Gillespie, A., 2010).
The Crown Court and the Supreme Court are the courts where criminal trials take place. These are where laws are upheld and enforced. However, England being a common-law country, it is one of the few that do not have a codified set of...
Other Commonwealth countries do have codified laws however. The Executive body is part of the Parliament in that it is made up of members of Parliament, both Houses. Each house has a separate court and a Court of Appeals exists as well. This makes up the judiciary branch of English Law. These courts interpret the laws while the executive body enforces them.
The European Court of Justice is the highest court relative to matters of European Union law. It interprets EU law and helps to make sure that the laws' applications are equal across the EU and each member state. This court is based in the European country of Luxembourg and was established in 1952 after many European nations had begun to rebuild both economically and politically after World War Two (Wilson, et. al., 2001). One distinction that should be made about the European Court of Justice is that it is only the highest authority of EU law relative to community law. It is not the highest authority relative to each member nation (Wilson, et. al., 2001). Each of these members has their own legal system with their own courts.
The European Court of Justice has 13 Grand Judges who work together to maintain that EU law is observed in the interpretation and application of the Treaties of the European Union. This court has worked for nearly 60 years to help stimulate positive growth and EU member state integration.
The European Court of Human Rights was established in 1959 after the European Convention of Human Rights (Zander, M., 2007). The court itself works to uphold this convention and caters to those who have grievances related to human rights issues in EU member states. The court has been a popular place for those with grievances to be heard with over 100,000 pending applications in 2009.
The major difference between the European Court of Human Rights and…
Works Cited
English Supreme Court. (2011). "The Supreme Court and Europe." Accessed on ESC Homepage
September 29, 2011. < http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/about/the-supreme-court-and-europe.html>.
Gillespie, A. (2010). "The English Legal System." IALS Conference Transcripts. Leicester. Pp.
259-264.
The Da Costa ruling, however, determined that any ruling of the European Court of Justice must necessarily apply to all national courts when interpreting Community Law (Craig 2001). In this way, the law is guaranteed to be applied evenly in and in the same manner in all member nation courts when deciding Community Law issues, whereas prior to this ruling differing interpretations of the same facets of Community Law
For example, the Parliament passed the "Year and a Day Rule" Act in 1996 that changed the previous murder and manslaughter law that specified that a person could be charged with murder or manslaughter if the victim died within a year and a day of receiving his injuries. The change was made to reflect modern development in medical science, which enabled injured people to remain alive for longer periods. Changes
It also illustrates how many of the same human rights that the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted and applied are protected by others in a similar way." (Youm, 2007) It is noted that Louis Henkin stated of the U.S. constitutional system and international human rights, that each of these continue to influence each other. U.S. constitutional jurisprudence is invoked by international bodies, in particular by the European and the Inter-American
European Union Regulations EU law is used as a source of law to member states of the union. Article 288 of the (TFEU) states that, regulations expressed to have 'general application' means that it creates binding obligations to legal practitioners within the jurisdiction of the union. They create general law with the potential of affecting anyone who is within the reach. The EU law takes the nature of direct effect, which
This chapter is completed with further information on a legal analysis in chapter 12, which discusses the organization of the results of the research. The Honigsberg Grid is amply described as a useful instrument in such an organization. Chapter 13 presents directions as to how a memorandum of law should be written, as well as some of its most important characteristics, notably the fact that this needs to be an
The NPC, importantly, controls both legislative and judicial functions -- true to the consolidation of power in communism. When discussing the Chinese judiciary, one must understand there are no juries, only judges; and hearsay is admissible as evidence, unlike the civil tradition. However, in keeping with civil tradition, evidence obtained from documents carries more weight than oral testimony. The judge in a Chinese court is not interested in defending