Paste your essay in here…Regina V Adebolajo and another:
This case states that the defendant was a soldier of Allah and that his actions were made in the name of Islam. The defendant believed he was fighting the good fight and that he had to murder the victim in honour of his religion. The defendant was convicted of the malicious and brutal murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby which happened in London. They were both sentenced to prison where Adebolajo was sentenced to life and Adebowale was sentenced to 45 years imprisonment. However, they now both tried to appeal the decision. Adebolajo had fought the case and tried to argue that he was fighting a war against the United Kingdom. The two defendants protested that the killing was not within the Queen;s Peace and therefore the killing was unlawful. The defendants showed no remorse for their actions stating to the members of the jury that they were obeying the wishes of Allah and had no other choice than to comply with God’s wishes. The appeal had failed because of the nature of the crime. The defendant displayed how he held the victim’s hair as he beheaded him. The judged denied their appeal because he saw fit that their defence could not be put before the jury. The defendant Adebolajo tried to appeal the judge’s ruling under the basis that the ruling was wrong however, this was deemed barbaric. The appeals were denied because the case was justified and the defendants deserved to be in long life imprisonment.
Case of Peck v United Kingdom:
This case is about an applicant who was filmed by a CCTV camera which was operated by Brentwood Borough Council. The incident happened on a public street where he had tried to commit suicide by cutting his wrists with a kitchen knife. The police came just in time and were able to rescue him and prevent him from causing himself harm. Furthermore, a few months later the council spread two photographs which were taken from the CCTV footage for publication about the awareness and benefits that come with CCTV. However, the applicants face was not covered. The CCTV footage was shown on television in which the applicants face was covered. The issue is that the applicant pleaded that his right just like any other individual to a private life under Article 8 ECHR had been compromised by the release of the CCTV footage by the council. The European Court of Human Rights found out that there was a breach of Article 8. They stated that there was no real reason to support the release of the CCTV footage which had uncovered the applicant’s identity. Also, regarding the release of the CCTV footage there had been poor safeguards put in place to assure the safety of the applicant. The protection of an individuals personal data is of important value to an individual’s enjoyment of his or her discreet life. Article 8 stated that even though the applicant was in a public street because he was not involved in a public gathering and was not a public figure. The applicant’s media appeareances did not reduce the serious nature of the intereference.
Airedale N.H.S Trust v Bland:
The young supporter of Liverpool FC named Tory Bland who was caught in the midst of the Hillsborough disaster which had reduced him to a vegetative state. He had been in this position for three years and he was being kept alive by life support machines. His brain cells were still working which was controllong his heart rhytm, breathing and digestion. He did not have any consciousness had a zero percent chance of recovery. The hospital applied for a declaration with the approval of his parents that it discontinue all his life-sustaining treatment and medical help that is designed to keep him alive which includes the ending of ventilation, nutrition and hydration by any artificial means. Tory Bland could breathe on his own but required a feeding tube and he received full time care. This declaration was granted. However, this decision was appealed to the House of Lords by the Solicitor who was speaking on behalf of Bland. The issues regarding this was that a patient who is in this kind of situation cannot speak on their own behalf and give consent. The doctors then take full control of the situation and give their best medical advice on whether or not to continue being on life support. The doctors have a duty to act professional and in the best interest of their patients however, this does not mean for them to prolong life. Knowing that there was no room for improvement, the doctors deemed that prolonging his life was not in his best interests. In this circumstance, it was justifiable to withhold life-extending help which in this particular reason was the food that the young adult was being fed through a tube. The appeal had been dismissed.
The effectiveness on the English Legal System:
This essay will be discussing the effectiveness of the English legal system and its advantages and disadvantages. The English legal system is a process for explaining and enforcing the law. The most important legal systems of the English legal system including civil and criminal law. The legal system is administered by the courts in England and Wales. The reason why we have laws according to the philosopher John Stewart Mill is that we should not only have laws that regulate behaviour of citizens if that action directly harms the other citizens.
The definition of common law is that the laws are made by the judges as opposed to a parliament. The decision of both criminal and civil matters are made by the judges. The ruling and develop precedents are also made by judges. Judicial precedent is decisions that are made by judges that create law for other judges to follow in that pursuit. The English law is based on the common law tradition. This meaning a system of laws made by judges which has thoroughly developed over the years. The court procedures are accusatorial. This means that the judges do not look into cases before them however, they reach a decision centred only on the evidence that is presented to them by the individuals to dispute. The advantages of common law are that it provides us with consistency however, it also allows for flexibility and change in making law. In addition, to this would be that common law is quicker and more responsive than the parliamentary law. Common law usually acknowledges and responds more quicker to alternating social values and community expectation. However there are some disadvantages about common law which is undemocratic law. The parliamentarians are elected by the people and are responsible for the people whereas the judges are appointed by the court. Furthermore, the courts lack personnel, time, resources and the opportunity to fully think about the changes they make to common law. (lawgovpol.com, 2018)
An example of a case would be Sedley, LJ in King v Daltry had voiced out his annoyance over the lack of carelessness and unjust delays in the county court case particularly caused by “thousand of cases awaiting decisions on a variety of arguments….caused by uncertainty in the law and the complexity of the cases themselves….many of which should have been disposed of at the paper stage of an interlocutory judgement…” This shows the frustration caused by the lack of urgency with the courts being slow is starting to affect people. (Lawteacher.net, 2018)
Ratio Decidendi is a phrase in Latin which means “the reason” or another meaning is “the rationale for the decision”.
The British constitution establishes that parliament is sovereign which means that any other law in Britain that are above laws made by the government. Parliament can only create law and not a single court in the U.K can restrict Parliament’s law making. The parliament can make any law they please, and the courts must apply that law. The parliament can cancel any law it chooses to and the courts must enforce that law. (Lawteacher.net, 2018). In Britain, majority of the laws have an element of fairness and moral consensus.
Criminal and civil law are two completely different things. Criminal law cases involve the prosecution of a person who has committed a criminal offence. A criminal case is started by the prosecutor. An individual who is convicted of a criminal offence can get incarcerated or be told to pay a fine. A crime is any act that violates a law. Criminal cases are generally murder, rape, assault and robbery. Offences that come under criminal law is seen as being against the public. For example, if there was a serial killer loose that would mean the threat is on the public and to keep them safe. The criminal law is dealt accordingly by public services. However, the difference in a civil case, the lawsuit is brought by a person. An individual or business found legally responsible in a civil lawsuit may be ordered to pay money or give up their property. However, the individual is not subject to imprisonment. Civil law looks at action that tend to not be crimes. In civil law it is their decision and responsibility to take further action and go to court individually or with their lawyer present. However, this does not occur in criminal law whereas the state chooses whether to take action or not and making sure that justice is served even if the defendant is willing to go to court or not. (Legal Dictionary, 2018)
The literal rule is the first rule that is applied by judges which takes rank over the other rules. The words of these rules are used by the judge by which their exact meaning is put in front of the court. Hence, it cannot be changed to explain the case to a defendants desirable result meaning that it must be used in its original form.