Question 1
There are three sources of English law, EU(European) law, statutes (acts of parliament), and common law (case law/judge-made law). Accordingly, “the UK signed a Treaty in 1957 to become part of the EU in 1973”, which means the EU law takes precedence over UK law together with the passing of the European Communities Act 1972 by the UK parliament. (Lawteacher.net) Besides, European law is accepted as part of UK law. This statute leads to Community Law become directly effective in UK courts. European legislation consolidates or codifies laws, and “Consolidation brings different statutes under one statute without change, such as the Insolvency Act 1986.” A single European Act was signed to remove all barriers to each country in 1992, and it also reinforces the powers of the European Parliament. Besides, a division of the European Court of Justice is created by the European Act, which is the Court of First Insurance. The treaty of Amsterdam was signed in 1997 to strengthen the importance of the European Union as a whole, so resulting in a more political power of the European Parliament to regulate its member countries. Also, the distinction between ‘directly applicable’ and ‘direct effect’ should be addressed while understanding EU law. “Legislation is the statutes passed by Queen and Parliament.” EU legislation would form some parts of the domestic law of Member States if it is directly applicable. However, there is “No EU legislation which has direct effect unless it satisfies the criteria laid down by the Court of Justice Van Gend en Loos v Nederland Administratie der Belastingen(1963).” Consequently, only fractions of EU legislation can meet those criteria and impact English law. For those EU laws that are indirectly enforceable, British national courts shall not bring the law in the UK’s legal system. Moreover, national courts are obliged to interpret their own laws in the context of those laws not contradicting with EU law. Specifically, the devolved legislation is a major source of statutes. In terms of the British constitutional effect, there are basically two types of English law, which are civil and criminal respectively. Criminal law is regarded as public law, and the British constitution contributes to one type of public law which is the constitutional law. Another source of law is from the court of the justice of the European Union. Courts need to enforce acts of parliament, which is also called statues, and hence making contributions to English law. Additionally, the parliament and the Council of Ministers amend, approve, or reject EU laws, so parliament makes determinant effects.
Question 2
In this case, Richard didn’t recognize the red light and caused Lily’s injuries through driving. Also, “The injured pedestrian might sue the driver in the civil courts for the tort of negligence. If the driver is found to have committed this tort, then damages will be sought to compensate for the pedestrian’s injuries.” Lily’s doctor is liable for the prescription that leads to Lily’s allergies. Edward is the mechanic who repaired Richard’s car, however, the job is not done properly, and resulting in a car accident and injuries of Ali. Those four events are generally similar which the breach of civil law and tort law both occurs. Civil law requires intention of Actus Reus only, and in the cases mentioned above, there’s no guilty mind, so those cases deal with civil laws. Civil laws revolve any disputes occurred between individuals. Similarly, tort laws can be applied as well. A tort is a civil wrong, and it does not require contracts. There are three elements of tort law, including a duty of care (Caparo Industries v Dickman), breach of that duty of care, and unforeseeable loss of that breach (Wagon Mound 1961). In addition, an existence of a causal link is crucial as well to show the relation. A duty of care is connected with the neighbor principle, which is established in the case of Lord Atkins in Donoghue v Steven. Neighbors are ‘Persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions that are called in question’. In this case, every defendant should take care of his/her neighbor. Breach of duty occurs if defendants’ conduct does not reach the accepted standard and does not take reasonable care of their neighbor. The case between Richard and Ali is slightly different because Ali has a contributory negligence by not wearing a seatbelt and not responding quickly to another coming towards. Therefore, the negligence is caused by the defendant and the claimant by both of their own negligence. This will effectively result in mitigations of the defence and possibly cause the compensation to reduce. To explain it in detail, the defence is basically using ‘Audi alteram partem’ when judges allow both sides’ voice to be heard.
Question 3
(a) Bill is an offeror, and he has made a bilateral contract with Annabelle orally because three basic elements of contract law are satisfied, which are agreement, consideration, and an intention to be legally bond respectively. An agreement is made by Annabelle to trade, and the importance of acceptance is demonstrated in Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation (1955). Consideration, which must have a monetary value, has been made to be £1 million, and this creates a legally binding agreement through communication between offeror and offeree. This case deals with executed consideration as dealing with the claimant fulfilling his liability under the contract while the defendant does not stick to her contractual liability. Carlill v The Carbolic is a typical case of the executed consideration in which Mrs. Carlille’s consideration was executed, and that she did not use a smoke ball to catch flu. While The Carbolic was executory by promising to do something in the future. According to Lampleign v Brathwaite (1615), both parties, in this case, have contemplated that the offeree would be paid during the transaction. However, Annabelle withdrew the deal, and this is not allowed since there is no counter offer being made, so a breach of contract has occurred. In addition, a revocation is not accepted when an acceptance is made, so Bill is very likely to win the case if he makes a claim towards Annabelle. Also, a breach of condition occurs, which is not obeying the major term vital to the purpose of the contract. The purpose of the contract is to trade diamonds with cash, however, Annabelle traded diamonds with someone else, which breaches the contract made with Bill. Common law remedies towards the case include nominal damages. Damages are made to compensate for losses caused by the breach of contract, and they suit the rules set out in Hadley v Baxendale (1854). In this case, nominal damages are applicable by the court to award compensation when the contract has broken. In addition, an alternative remedy can be awarded as well at the discretion of the court when nominal damages are considered to be not enough. Injunction made in the case of Warner Bros V Nelson (1937) might be put to use if the court tries to enforce the continuation of the contract, and it is one type of equitable remedies. Also, this case is a civil case in which only two people are involved, so the claimant needs to prove the case on the balance of possibilities resulting in true accusation.
(b) If Annabelle will be an adult in one-month time,
(c) Consumer Rights Act (2015) can be used for consumer protection between a trader and consumers. According to section 10, goods to be fit for a specific purpose; section 14, goods to match a model seen or examined. Grant v Australian Mills (1936), Griffiths v Peter Conway Ltd (1939), and Jewson Ltd v Kelly (2002) prove the importance of fitting the purpose. While in this case, some conditions of the contract have been breached shown as the handle on the Superiron 55 is much smaller than the display one, and Martin can’t put his finger in it, which is not reasonably fit for the purpose of using it to press clothes to remove creases. This contract is technically repudiated and the innocent party can be eligible to claim damages.
There are various remedies for the breach of contract. Normally, there is a 30-day period for consumers to reject goods, which do not conform to the contract. If the return is rejected, then the faulty item should result in price reduction or rejection. In addition, longer term to reject the item can take for 30 days to 6 months, or after 6 months. However, evidence required after 6 months are intricate and often need consumers to prove the item was faulty at the time of delivery through experts’ report.
If Martin sues the ‘Big store’, then he needs to
References
Essentials of Business Law p2
Lawteacher.net. Most important sources of English Law. [online] Available at: https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/constitutional-law/most-important-source-of-english-law-constitutional-law-essay.php