8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
1/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
1
UniversitRoyaledeDroitetdesSciencesconomiques
UniversitLumireLyon2
FilireSpcialedeDroit
20112012
COMMONLAWSourceduDroitAnglosaxon
Enseignant:M.RithyCHEY
Encollaboration
avec
M.
Serge
BASSET
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
2/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
2
SOURCE DU DROIT ANGLO-SAXONElmentsdelaBibliographie
Ouvrages,manuels,Raymond Legeais, Les grands systmes de droit contemporains, une approche
comparative, Litec (Manuel) 2008, 494 pages.Michel Fromont, Grandssystmesdedroittrangers, Mmentos Dalloz, 4edition 2005,
197 pages.
Michel L. Wells, Introduction to American Law, University of Georgia Law School, Cours,
indit.
Alain V. Levasseur, Ledroitamricain, DallozConnaissance du droit, 2004, 162 pages.
Rn David, Camille JauffretSpinosi, Lesgrandssystmesdedroitcontemporains, Dalloz
Prcis, 11edition 2002, 553 pages.
Roland Sroussi, Introductionaudroitanglaisetamricain, Dunod 3edition 2003, 200
pages.
Roland Sroussi, Introductionau
droit
compar, Dunod 2edition 2003, 208 pages.
Francis Lefebvre, RoyaumeUni (Juridique, fiscal, social, comptable), Dossiers
Internationaux dition Francis Lefebvre 2003, 535 pages.
Slapper Gary & Kelly David, The English Legal System 20092010, 10th Revised Edition,
Routledge Cavendish, 2009,
Holland James & Webb Julian, Learning Legal Rules, 6th Edition, Oxford University Press,
2006,
James Philip S, Introduction To English Law, 12th Edition, Butterworths, 1989,
Osborns Concise Law Dictionary, 10th Edition, Edited By Mick Woodley, Thomson &
Sweet&Maxwell, 2005,
Harraps Dictionnaire Juridique/Law Dictionary, FranaisAnglais/EnglishFrench,Dalloz, 2004.
Sitesdinternet- Journal Officiel de lUnion Europenne, http://eur
lex.europa.eu/JOIndex.do?ihmlang=en
- Journal Officiel des RoyaumesUnis, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/
- Journal Officiel des EtatsUnis, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/legislative.html
- Journal Officiel de lAustralie, http://australia.gov.au/publications/australian
governmentgazettes
- Journal Officiel de Canada, http://canadagazette.gc.ca/- Journal Officiel du Qubec,
http://www3.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/gazetteofficielle.fr.html
- Journal Officiel de la France, http://www.journalofficiel.gouv.fr/
- Journal Officiel de la Chine,
http://english.gov.cn/documents/gazettes/previous/index.htm
- Journal Officiel de la Confdration suisse,
http://www.admin.ch/ch/f/ff/index.html
- Site dun Professeur canadien, Vincent Gautrais, www.gautrais.com
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
3/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
3
PLAN DU COURSChap 1: What is law and where does it originate?
General overview
Part one: legislation
Part two: the courts
Chap 2: the new U.K. Supreme Court
Chap 3: the Rule of Law (theoretical approach)
Chap 4: legislation and statutory interpretation
Chap 5: the making of legislation
Chap 6: the doctrine of judicial precedent
Chap 7: Stare decisis, ratio decidendi and obiter dictum
What is binding and nonbinding in a court decision?
Chap 8: Equity: a brief history; equity today
Chap 9: the personnel of the law: judges, barristers and solicitors
Chap 10: the effects of European Law on the drafting and interpretation of UK
legislation
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
4/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
4
THESOURCESOFANGLOSAXONLAW
CHAPTER ONE:WHAT IS LAW AND WHERE DOES IT COME FROM?
GENERALOVERVIEW
Muchhasbeen saidabout thedifferencesbetween the common law,which isamajor sourceof
AngloSaxon
law,
and
continental
law,
that
is
Germano
Roman
law,
which
prevails
in
continental
Europe.
Practice, however, and the evolution of legal systems the world over, contradicts that clich of
systemsthatarepolesapart.Constitutionallyspeaking,BritishmembershipoftheUnion (thenthe
European Community) since Jan 1st, 1973, has eroded the sacrosanct doctrine of Parliamentary
sovereignty that stood supreme since theGloriousRevolution (a.k.a. theBloodlessRevolution)of
168889. The same doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty was later further undermined by the
incorporationof ECHR(theEuropeanConventiononHumanRights)underthefirstBlairgovernment
in
1998
into
English
law.
Also,academicsand legalwriters,likeGarySlapperinthearticlewrittenforTheLondonTimesthat
youwillfind intheappendixtoPartOne,oftenemphasisetheoralityofGreatBritish lawandthe
fact that English law is not codified.As youwill see in Chapters 5 and 6, however, even though
English law isstillcaselaw (that isjudgemade law,a.k.a.unwritten law),thebalance ismoreand
moretiltedtowardswrittenlaw,thatis,thelawmadebyParliament,underthecombinedinfluence
ofEuropeanlawandtheeverspreadingwelfarestate.Theremaynotbecodificationperse,butan
exponentional rise of written law, especially by the use (or abuse?) of delegated legislation by
governmentofficialsanddepartments.
Lastly,Iwould liketosayafewwordsaboutthewordingofthetitletothecourse,thesourcesof
AngloSaxon law.Asyouwillquickly realise, themain, ifnot single focus,willbeonEnglish law,
whichmeansthelawas itappliesandEnglandandWales.This isduetothefactthatEnglish lawis
themotherofallothersystemsusedinAngloSaxoncountries.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
5/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
5
PARTONE:INTRODUCTIONANDLEGISLATION
1.WHATISLAW?
Whatis law?This isaquestionthathascausedphilosophersandlegaltheoriststowritevolumesin
tryingtoanswer.
Someoftheiranswerswere,reducedtotheirmostbasicform:
Lawisasystemofruleslaiddownbyanorganisation orapersonvestedwiththepowerand
authorityto
make
law;
Lawiswhatlegislators,judges,andlawyersdoormake;
Lawisatoolofoppressionusedbytherulingclasstopromoteitsowninterests;
Lawisasystemofrulesbasedonfundamentalprinciplesofmorality.
Each of these answers tells us something useful about the nature of law and how it works.
In this chapter, we shall take the question What is law? in two stages. First, we shall briefly
distinguishlawfromotherrules;thenweshallexplainwhatwemeanbyaninstitutionalsource,and
howithelpsustounderstandthelaw.
1.1Legalrulesandsocialrules
Lawisdefinableasasystemofrules.Muchofourdailylifeisguidedanddirectedbylegalrulesfrom
shoppingtoourrelationshipwiththeState.
Ofcourse,anysociety isgovernedbyamassofotherruleswhicharenot laws intheformalsense,
butmerely social conventions. In actual fact, these are alsomeans of controlling social conduct.
Whysome rulesshouldbegiventhe forceof lawandothersnot isanotherofthosephilosophical
questionstowhichwedonothaveafullanswer.Lawisindeednotthesameeverywhere.Takelaws
governingadulteryforexample;inmodernEnglishlaw,apersonwhohasasexualrelationshipwith
anothersspousewillincurnolegalpenalty,evenifheorshemayendupbeingtakentocourtina
divorce case. In Islamic law, theQuranprohibits adulterybymaking ita crime, and subjects the
partiestothepunishmentof floggingorstoning; inancientGreece, togiveahistoricalexample,a
manwhoseducedanothermanswifecouldfaceaclaimforcompensation,sincehehadviolatedthe
propertyrightsofhislovershusband.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
6/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
6
Thus, thedifferent lawsonadultery couldbe said toexistasa reflectionofdifferent religiousor
moralstandpointstakenbythe law;perhaps,theyalsoreflectdiverseviewsofhumansexuality,or
thestatusofmenandwomeninasociety.Thisculturaldimensionoflawisimportantindeveloping
ourunderstandingofwhyparticular legal ruleshavedevelopedorwhydifferent legal traditions
have evolved indifferent countries. The culturaldimensionhasbecome increasingly important in
legaleducationoverthepastthirtyyearsorso.
1.2Theinstitutionalsourcesoflaw
Generally, lawscanbe identifiedby the fact that they takea formwhichdistinguishes them from
social conventions. Their form tells us that they are derived from an institutional source that is
sociallyrecognisedashavingthepowertocreatelaw.Onlylawscreatedinthiswaycanbesaidtobe
legallybindingupontheindividual,orevenupontheStateitself.
In English law, there are fourmain institutional sourceswhichwe shall consider:Parliament, the
courts,theEuropeanCommunityandtheEuropeanConventiononHumanRights.Totheseprimary
sources shouldbeadded secondary sources,whichare literarysources (legalencyclopaedias, for
instance)forthemostpart.
2.PARLIAMENT
Parliament is significant for three reasons. Firstly, it is from Parliament that the probably most
importantsourceof laworiginatesthat is,statute law. Inthesecondplace,through its legislative
powers,Parliament is able togive lawmakingpowers tootherbodies, such as local councilsand
Government departments. This results in a form of law that is called delegated or secondary
legislation. Thirdly, Parliaments delegatory powers are being increasingly used to create sets of
informalruleswhichoperatewithintheframeworkofformalrulescreatedbystatute.
2.1StatuteLaw
Astatute isadocumentwhichcontains lawsmadebyParliament.Statutesarealso referred toas
ActsofParliament.Eachstatuteusuallydealswithaseparatetopicsuchas,for instance,theTheft
Act1968or theSalesofGoodsAct1979.Statutesarenow found in virtuallyall fieldsof lawand
regulateallsortsofactivities.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
7/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
7
Statutesare createddirectlybyParliament, followingprocedures laiddown inboth theHouseof
CommonsandtheHouseofLordsthatwillbestudiedlateroninthiscourseinthechapterdevoted
tothemakingoflegislation.AstatutebecomeslawonlyafterithasbeenintroducedintoParliament
asaBill,beenapprovedbyParliamentandhassatisfiedtheformalityofobtainingtheRoyalAssent.
Once an Act has been passed it cannot be impeached. As Lord Campbell put it in Edinburgh&
DalkeithRailwayvWauchope(1842)8Cl&F710:
NoCourtofJusticecan inquire into themode inwhich itwas introduced intoParliament,nor into
whatwasdoneprevioustoitsintroduction,orwhatpassedinParliamentduringitsprogress.
LordCampbells statement still ringsbroadly true today. There isno singleUnitedKingdom court
with the power equivalent to, for example, the Supreme Court of the USA to declare domestic
legislationunconstitutional and therefore invalid. This absenceof constitutional review reflects a
principle called the Sovereignty of Parliament,whichmeans that Parliament is the supreme law
makerandthatthere isno formof lawthat issuperiortoanActofParliament.Thesupremacyof
ParliamentisimportantforLegalMethod,sinceitcreatesadivisionbetweenlawmakingandjudicial
functionsin
the
State.
As
aresult,
the
English
judge
is
careful
not
to
tread
on
the
legislators
toes.
Thisdoesnotmeanhowever that thereareno circumstances inwhicha court can challenge the
legality or general application of primary legislation. Indeed, there are at least three avenues
wherebythevalidityoflegislationmaybechallengedincourt.
Firstly,evenParliamentmustabidebythe law.Consequently, intheoryat least, ifParliament itself
broke the law, the courts could declare that any resulting legislation was not a valid Act of
Parliament.AgoodandrecentexampleofanActbeingchallenged istheHuntingAct2004,which
bannedfoxhuntingwithdogs.TheoriginalHuntingBillhadbeenstronglyopposed intheHouseof
Lordsand
was
passed
only
by
the
House
of
Commons
invoking
aspecial
procedure,
created
by
the
ParliamentActsof1911and1949,whichallowsBillspassedbytheCommonstobecomelawwithout
theconsentoftheLords.OpponentsoftheHuntingActchallenged its legalitybyarguingakindof
domino effect. TheHunting Act, they claimed,was invalid because itwas deemed to be passed
accordingtoatimelimitestablishedbytheParliamentAct1949.ButtheParliamentAct1949,which
amendedthetime limitcontained intheParliamentAct1911,was,thecriticsargued, itself invalid
becauseitwasonlypassedasaconsequenceofthespecialproceduresintheParliamentAct1911.In
short, inthecriticsview, the1911Actcouldnotbeused toauthorise itsownamendment inthis
way.Althoughtheargumentfailedateverystageofthelegalprocess,itwentallthewayuptothe
HouseofLordsasaCourtof Justice,thehighestcourt intherealmseeR (Jacksonandothers)v
AttorneyGeneral [2005]WLR (D) 129. There, a panel of nine Law Lords finally and unanimously
rejectedthe
pro
hunting
lobbys
claims
on
the
basis
that,
on
aproper
interpretation,
the
1911
Act
didnotprecludetheuseofitsownprocedurestoamenditself,andconsequentlyboththe1949and
2004Actswerevalid.
Secondly,theUnitedKingdomsmembershipoftheEuropeanUnionhasalsohadan impactonthe
relationshipbetweenthecourtsandParliament,totheextentthatthesuperiorcourtsmayoverride
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
8/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
8
or disapplyanActofParliamentthatconflictswithdirectlyenforceableEuropean lawasweshall
laterseeinthiscourse.
Thirdly, under theHuman RightsAct 1998, the courts also have the power to declare legislation
incompatiblewiththe fundamentalrightscontained intheEuropeanConventiononHumanRights
(ECHR),whichwillbediscussedindetaillatertoo.
ThegrowthoflegislationhasbeenaprominentfeatureoftheEnglishlegalsystemoverthelast100
orsoyears.Itreflectstheextenttowhichgovernmenthasextended itscontroloverouractivities.
ThisisparticularlytruesincetheemergenceoftheWelfareStateinthe1940s.
Asaresult,manyimportantfields,suchasemployment,childcareandsocialsecuritylaw,owetheir
existenceessentiallytostatute.
Thevolume
of
legislation
has
grown
exponentially:
for
instance,
the
number
of
Acts
passed
increased
by an annual 20 percent between 1964 and 1974; or, seen from another angle, the volume of
legislationrosesteadilyfrom745pagespersessioninthe1950sto1,525pagesinthe1980s.
2.2Delegatedlegislation
ActsofParliamentprovidealegitimatemeanswherebyParliamentcanpasson,ordelegate,itslaw
makingpowerstoanotherbodyorperson.
Mostdelegatedlegislationispublishedasstatutoryinstruments;thesearealsosometimesreferred
toasRegulations.Thevolumeofstatutory instruments isconsiderable:almost28,000 instruments
weremadebetween1987and1997.Statutory instrumentsarenotjustquantitatively important.In
practice,wholeareasof law,suchassocialsecurityor immigration,aredependentonRegulations,
which will be of greater daily significance than statute. Delegation always requires the express
authorityofanActofParliament,which,willbereferredtoastheparentAct.TheparentActwillnot
onlygiveauthority to theprocessofdelegation,butalsowillset theparametersofthedelegated
power.
Practically,theabilitytodelegatecarriesgreatadvantages,asdelegated legislationcantakeeffect
more quickly, and deal more easily with technical detail, than statute law; this said, Parliament
exercises little control over delegated legislation, so there is concern that these advantages are
boughtatsomecosttotheConstitution.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
9/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
9
2.3Informalrules
Informalrulesaremostlycreatedbyministerialpowersgrantedundertheauthorityofstatute.
They are givenmany aname likeDirections,Guidance,Circulars andCodesofPractice. They are
informalbecausetheycanbecontrastedwiththeformalitiesnecessarytocreateanActorstatutory
instrument,and
because
their
structure
and
operation
are
also
often
less
formalised.
Informal does not mean that those rules are unimportant. Many play a significant part in the
regulationofquiteafewpublicorganisations.Mostofthoserulesregulateofficialdiscretion,which,
accordingtoProfessorGilligan, istheextenttowhichofficialsmakedecisions intheabsenceof
previouslyfixed,relativelyclear,andbindinglegalstandards.
Indeed, in the daily running of business, officials must often resort to their ownjudgement in
decidingwhethera ruleapplies. Informal ruleshelpsaidofficials touse theirdiscretioneffectively
andcanimposerestrictionsuponit.Atthesametime,however,thereisconcernthattheincreasing
useof
such
rules
reduces
the
ability
of
Parliament
and
the
courts
to
maintain
acheck
on
the
activities
ofstatebureaucracies.
Toanevengreaterextentthandelegated legislation, informal rulesareamoderndevelopment in
theEnglishlegalsystem.Theyareoftensaidtofallintothreecategories:
Proceduralrules,bywhichwemeanthatmanypublicorganisationslaydownproceduresfor
outsiderstofollow;forinstance,procedurestoclaimsomesocialsecuritybenefit.
Interpretativeguides,whichare officialstatementsofdepartmentalpolicyexpressionsof
criteriatobefollowed,standardstobeenforcedorconsiderationstobetakenintoaccount,
accordingtoBaldwin&Houghton,andwhichmaybemadeavailabletothepublictoinform
themoftheirrights,etc.
Instructions toofficials, that resemble interpretative guides, are oftenmerely intended to
give guidance to officials, not to citizens, but not always. For example, theAdjudication
OfficersGuideusedbysocialsecurityofficialispublishedandthusseemstofallbetweenour
twocategories.
Informalrulesdonotapplytothepublicatlarge.Somearenotpublished,whileothersareavailable
publicly. In form, such ruleswill also vary considerably.A particularly interesting example of the
typesofinformalrulethatexistwasprovidedbytheSocialFundManual,nowreplacedbytheSocial
FundGuideandtheDecisionMakersGuide.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
10/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
10
Themanualcontainedatwotieredsystemof informalruleswhichwereprovidedtoofficersofthe
DepartmentofSocialSecuritytoassistindeterminingapplicationsmadebysocialsecurityclaimants
forgrantsorloansforspecialneeds.ThedistinctionwasmadebetweenDirectionsandGuidance
inthescheme.Theformerhadtobestrictlyappliedbyofficers,whilethelatterwasmeantonlytobe
indicative,leavingtheofficerfreetoexercisediscretioninthecaseconcerned.WhentheSecretaryof
StatepublishedGuidancethatusedthemandatory languageoftheDirections,thecourtfoundhim
tobeacting inexcessofhisstatutorypowers(RvSocialFund InspectorandSecretaryofStatefor
SocialSecurity
ex
parte
Roberts,
the
Times,
Feb.
23
rd
,1990).
To
put
it
simply,
guidance
which
directs
officialstodosomethingisnolongerguidance.
Although legislation iscrucial, itcannotoperate in isolation.Legislationrequires implementation.In
thisprocess,questionsmayberaisedabouttheeffectofaparticularpieceoflegislation.Oftenthese
willinvolvetechnicalquestionsofinterpretation.Thatprocessofinterpretationisusuallyundertaken
bythecourts.
APPENDIX
1. Imsorry,wouldyoumindrepeating
that?GarySlapper,inTheTimes,March13,2007
Withoutadvocacytherecouldbenolegaljustice.Itisessentialthatwhatadvocatessayincourtisclearly
audibleandunderstoodbyallconcerned.Thatiswhyseniorjudgeshaveexpressedapreferencethatthe
fullIslamicveilshouldnotbewornincourt.ItalsoaccountsforwhytheCourtofAppealrecentlyordered
the retrial of an East Timorian man who had been convicted in proceedings that he did not fully
understandasanappropriatetranslatorhadnotbeenusedatthetrial.
FromancientCeltictimes, law inBritainhashadahistoryofforensicorality.Itwastheilliteracyofthat
time, and the AngloSaxon era, that begat the oral legal tradition. Repetition and tautology became
techniques inadvocacybecausetheearcannotbacktracktocheckonaspokenwordastheeyecanon
thepage.Sometimes, though,counsel todaycanbeuncomfortablyprolix.Seeing thejudge lookathis
watchanadvocateonceasked:AmItakingtoolong,Inoticedyourlordshipwaslookingatthetime?,to
whichthereplywas:Iwasnt lookingat the time, Iwas lookingat thedate.Frequentlyhearing long
windedargumentscanprovokejudicialimpatience.In1970inSheffield,MrJusticeHowardsentenceda
boyto14yearsbeforethecourthadbeentoldthefactsofthecase.
TheserenestresponsetoanauralfaultwasthatofaVancouverjudgewhotoldaconvicthecouldspeak
beforebeingsentenced,andasked:Whatwouldyouliketosay?F**kall,wasthecurtreply.What
didhesay? inquired thejudgecuppinghisear.Hesaid f**kall, thecourtclerkanswered.Thats
strange,thejudgedeclared,Imsurehesaidsomething.
EricHoekstra,aDutchphilosopher, isplanningto live foraweek inabarrel inhonourofDiogenesthe
Cynic who, in Ancient Greece, resided for some time in a large earthenwarejar. Hoekstra wants to
demonstratethatmandoesnotneedmuchtobehappy.Regrettably,Diogeneshadajaundicedopinion
ofthelegalprofession.Heoncewenttolookforanhonest lawyer.Howsitgoing?someoneinquired
after a while. Not too bad, he responded, I still have my lantern. He did, though, influence the
outcomeofonemodernAmericancase. In1977, inConnecticut,JusticeParskeyruledthataschoolboy
whohadgiventhefingerfromtherearwindowofabustoastatetrooperwasnotguiltyofmakingan
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
11/117
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
12/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
12
2. THECONTRASTWITHCIVILLAW
The termCivilLawdescribes those systems thathavedevelopedoutoftheRomanoGerman legal
traditionofcontinentalEurope.Itisalsoknownascontinentallaw.ThisCivilLawtraditionprevails
withintheEuropeanCommunity.Asof2006,onlytwoofthe25memberstates,namelytheRepublic
ofIrelandandtheUnitedKingdom,belongedtotheCommonLawworld.
Thereisaratherdifferentwayofthinkingaboutlawwithineachtradition.InCiviliansystems,there
isahigher
level
of
conceptualisation,
which
reflects
in
atheoretically
complex
institutional
basis.
It
is
sometimes argued that this creates a more scientific or rational legal system than the highly
pragmatictraditionofCommonLaw.Thishasanumberofpracticalimplications:
a) First,itcanbesaidthattheEnglishsystemsdependenceupondescriptivefactualcategories
(theformsofactioncitedpreviously)mayrestrainnewdevelopmentsinEnglishlaw,because
Englishjuristsdonothavetheconceptualarsenaltoincorporatechangeeasily.
b) Inthesecondplace,themodernCiviltradition ismainlybasedonprinciplesofcodifiedlaw.
ThisprocessofcodificationincontinentalEuropeowesalottotheRomans,andespeciallyto
theCorpusIurisCivilis(Latinforthebodyofcivillaw)thathasbeenhandeddowntousby
Emperor Justinian, that ruled from 527 to 565 AD. The assumption governing a codified
systemis
that
it
is
possible
to
create
aset
of
texts
containing
an
authoritative
statement
of
thelaw,habituallyintheformofCivilandCriminalCodes.EventhoughEnglishlawyersalso
talkaboutcodifyinglegislation,theyusetheterminaradicallydifferentway.
In theCommonLaw,acodifyingAct isapieceof legislationwhichbrings togetherall the
existing law on a topic, both statute and caselaw, and turns it into a single entity the
codifyingAct. By contrastwith the continent, codification in England has been used as a
limitedmeansof imposing legislativecoherenceonaparticularlyproblematicareaof law.
English codifications have never effected a complete restatement of the entirety of, for
example,CommercialLaw,inastatutoryform.Yetitispreciselythelatterapproachthathas
beenadoptedbythemajorityofciviliansystems.Toconcludeonthatpoint,fortheEnglish,
codificationhasneverbeenakeyinstrumenttoorganiseandconceptualisetherulesof law
that
make
up
a
legal
system.
c) Thirdly,intheory,codificationreducestheroleoftheCivilLawcourtstosimplyinterpreting
andapplyingthelawoftheCode.EnglishlawyershaveoftenarguedthatCivilianjudgesdid
notact inadual capacityas theCommon Law counterpartsdo; that isasbeingboth the
interpretersoflegislationandtheguardiansofadistinctbodyofcaselaw.Inactualfact,this
is not true, since most European countries have their own systems of precedent and
furthermore thewayCodes aredesigned leavesEuropeanjudges far greaterdiscretion in
interpretationthanEnglishlawyersmightthink.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
13/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
13
3. THECOURTSTRUCTURE
ThechartaboveshowsasimplifiedversionoftheEnglishcourtsystem.TheAppellateCommitteeof
theHouseofLordswasthefinalcourtofappealforcivilandcriminalcasesfromEnglandandWales
untilOctober2009,whentheSupremeCourtreplaceditasthehighestcourtintheUnitedKingdom.Source:http://www.law.duke.edu/lib/researchguides/english.html
ConcerningEnglishcourtsasasourceoflaw,twodistinctionsmustbedrawn:
a) Oneisthedistinctionbetweentrialcourtsandappellatecourts;andb) Theotheristhatbetweencivilcourtsandcriminalcourts.
Thefunctionoftrialcourts istohearcasesatfirst instance,that istosaytomakearulingontheissuesoffactandlawthatariseinthecase.Asforappellatecourts,theirpurposeistoreconsidertheapplication of legal principles to a case that has already been heard by a lower court. Trial and
appellatefunctionsareoftencombinedwithinonecourt.Civilandcriminal lawarequitedifferent in theiraimsandemploydifferent legalprocedures.The
termcivillawasopposedtotheCivilLawexaminedpreviouslyisusedtodescribeallthoseareasoflawthatgoverntherelationshipbetweenlegalpersons,thatistosayindividualsandcorporations,
suchasemploymentorcontract.Criminallaw,bycontrast,describesthosewrongswhichareseriousenough for society to outlaw them as crimes and to impose penalties on the wrongdoers, for
examplefinesorprisonsentences.Generallyspeaking,thereisafairlycleardistinctionbetweenthe
courtsthathavecivillawresponsibilities calledjurisdictionbylawyers andthosethathavecriminallawones.
Beforeconsideringtheroleofeachcourt,mentionshouldbemadeoftheConstitutionalReformAct2005.ThisAct modifies theofficeoftheLordChancellorandmakeschanges to theway inwhich
someof the functionsvested in thatofficeare tobeexercised.TheActalsocreates theSupreme
CourtoftheUnitedKingdomandabolishestheappellatejurisdictionoftheHouseofLords.Itcreates
the JudicialAppointments Commission to select people forjudicial appointments in England and
Wales,andprovidesforjudicialdisciplineinEnglandandWales.TheActmodifiesthejurisdictionof
the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and removes the right of the Lord President of the
Counciltositjudicially.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
14/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
14
3.1.THEHOUSEOFLORDS/THENEWU.K.SUPREMECOURT
TheHouseofLordsusedtotopthelegalpyramidofEnglishcourts.Itdealtonlywithappeals,mainly
fromtheCourtofAppeal,andsometimesdirectfromtheHighCourtthereforebypassingtheCourt
ofAppealthankstoaspecialprocedurecalledleapfroggingortheleapfrogprocedure.
Caseswerenormallyheardbyfivejudgesor,exceptionally,byasmanyassevenornine,ifthecases
werefelt
to
raise
issues
of
extreme
importance.
These
judges
were
known
as
Lords
of
Appeal
in
Ordinary,butthecommonpeopleandjournalists calledthemLawLords.
The Lords had finaljurisdictionoverboth civil and criminal appealsandhear relatively few cases
annually, no more than one hundred on average. Two reasons accounted for that state of fact.
Firstly,theHouseofLordsonlyallowedappealsinrespectofcasesthatraisepointsoflawofgeneral
publicimportance.Suchcasesareusuallyfewandfarbetween.Secondly,thecostoftakingacase
uptotheHouseofLordswasastronomical,andthisusedtodeterpeoplefromexercisingtherights
ofappealthattheyenjoy,unlesstheirclaimwasfinanciallyassistedbytheState.
TheofficeofLordChancellorhashistoricallycarriedthestatusofheadofthejudiciary(i.e.Minister
of Justice) and has included the right to sit as ajudge in theHouse of Lords, thoughmost Lord
Chancellors
in
recent
years
have
exercised
that
right
quite
sparingly.
In
line
with
the
mood
for
reform
ofPrimeMinisterBlairandhiswilltomodernisetheinstitutionsofthecountry,LordFalconer,who
wasmadeLordChancellorandSecretaryofStateforConstitutionalAffairsin2003,refusedtositasa
judge.
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 formalised this practice into a constitutional principle, and
transferred thejudicial functionsof theLordChancellor to theLordChief Justicewho,asa result,
became President of the Courts of England and Wales. The Lord Chief Justice however has not
inheritedtherighttositasajudgeintheLords.ThesameActprovidedforthereplacementofafinal
courtofappeal thatwasmoreclearly separated from the legislativearmof thegovernment.The
existingLawLordsweretobecomethefirstmembersoftheSupremeCourtbyvirtueofsection23of
theActand,bysection24,theseniorLawLordwastobecomePresidentoftheSupremeCourt.The
judgeswerenolongertobeknownasLordsofAppealinOrdinary,butweretobestyledJusticesof
theSupremeCourt.
ThesecondchapterinthepresentcourseisdedicatedtotheindepthstudyofthenewU.K.Supreme
Court.
3.2.THECOURTOFAPPEAL
TheCourtofAppealfallsintotwoDivisions,CivilandCriminal.
TheCivilDivisionwillhear appeals from theHighCourt and county courts.Cases areheardby a
minimumoftwo,butnormallythree,judgescalledLordsJusticesofAppeal.Aseniorjudgeknownas
theMaster of the Rolls heads thisDivision. SinceOctober 1st, 2005, the incumbent has been Sir
AnthonyClarkeM.R.
TheCriminalDivisionwillhearappealsagainsteitherconvictionorsentencefromtheCrownCourt.
CriminalcaseswillbeheardbyeithertwoorthreejudgesdrawnfromamongtheLordChiefJustice
(currently LordPhillipsofWorthMatravers), the Lords JusticesofAppeal,and Judgesof theHigh
Court.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
15/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
15
3.3.THEHIGHCOURT
TheCourtissubdividedintothreedivisions,eachofwhichhasaseparatejurisdictiontohearcases
atfirstinstance(i.e.trials).Thedivisionsare:
a) TheQueensBench,whichdealswiththemainareasofcommon law,suchascontractand
tort;
b) TheFamily
division,
which
deals
with
matrimonial
cases
and
the
wardship
and
adoption
of
children;and
c) TheChanceryDivision,whichdealswithcertainproperty,corporateandtaxmatters.
This seemsastraightforwardorganization,but it isnotthatsimple.Becausecommercial law itself
andthedemandsofcourtusershavebecomeincreasinglycomplexandspecialized,therehasbeena
growing need for specialization within the two divisions that have significant commercial law
jurisdiction,namelyQueensBenchandChancery.Asa result,anumberofspecialist,commercial,
trial courts have been createdwithin either of those two divisions, with specialistjudges being
assignedspecificallytothosecourts.
Each
Division
has
its
judicial
head.
The
head
of
the
Chancery
Division
is
called
the
Vice
Chancellor
andaPresident leadstheFamilyDivision.Historically,theheadoftheQueensBenchDivisionwas
the Lord Chief Justice, but the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 has relieved him of this role by
creatinganewpostofPresident.The firstPresidentoftheQBD,sinceOctober1st,2005,hasbeen
LordJustice(SirIgor)Judge.
Inadditiontothesefirstinstancejurisdictions,eachDivisionhasappellatefunctionsperformedbya
DivisionalCourt,whichwillbepresidedoverbytwoor threejudges.TheDivisionalcourtsof the
ChanceryandFamilyDivisionshavejurisdictionovercertainappeals fromcountyandmagistrates
courts.ThemainfunctionoftheDivisionalCourtoftheQBDhasbeentoexercisewhatiscalledthe
supervisoryjurisdiction of the High Court; that is to say the power to oversee the quality and
legalityofdecisionmakingininferiorcourtsandtribunals.
It alsooccasionally hears appeals bywayof case stated on points of law from themagistrates
courts and Crown Court. In October 2000, the Divisional Court of the QBD was renamed the
AdministrativeCourt.Itnowalsohasitsownnominatedleadjudgewhoisinchargeofoverseeing
itswork.Currently, this isMr. JusticeCollins.At first instance,casesareheardbyusuallya single
Puisne(pronouncedpuny)Judge.
3.4.THECOUNTYCOURT
Countycourts,whichwerecreated inthe19th
century,havegottwotypesofjudges:CircuitJudges
(themore senior)andDistrict Judges.Anappeal from thedecisionofaDistrict Judgewillgo toa
CircuitJudge.AnappealfromthedecisionofaCircuitJudgegoestotheCourtofAppeal.TheHigh
Courtandthecountycourtdealwiththesamesortof legal issues.Thedifference isthattheHighcourtdealsgenerallywiththemorelegallycomplexand/orhighermonetaryvalueclaims.
3.5.THECROWNCOURT
Thiscourtdealsessentiallywithcriminaltrialsandappeals.Mostofitscaseloadinvolvesthetrialat
first instanceofthemoreseriouscriminaloffences,suchashomicides,seriousphysicalandsexual
assaults,andpropertyoffences involving lossordamageofa highvalue.TheCrownCourt is the
onlycourt in theEnglish system inwhichajudge sitswithajury.The functionof thisjudge is to
advisethejuryonthelaw;thejury,however,remainsthesoletribunaloffact,anditisforthejury
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
16/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
16
alone to decide whether an accused is guilty or innocent as charged. The Crown Court has an
appellatejurisdiction:ithearsappealsfromthemagistratescourtsonissuesoffactorlaw.
3.6.THEMAGISTRATESCOURTS
Magistratescourtsarepurelycourtsof first instance.Theyaremainly inchargeof trying the less
seriouscriminaloffences.Actually,magistrates tryoverninetypercentofallcriminalcases.They
alsohavea civiljurisdictionover liquor licensing, taxarrears,and somematrimonialmatters.The
magistratescourt
is
unique
in
that
the
great
majority
of
cases
are
heard
before
Justices
of
the
Peace
laypersonswith little formalised legal training, though theyareadvisedon the legal issuesbya
legallyqualified Justicesclerk.Legallyqualifiedmagistratesmaysitalonetohearcases;theywere
formerlycalledStipendiaryJudgesbutnowtheyhavethetitleofDistrictJudge(Criminal).
3.7.ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNALSANDOTHERCOURTS
Inadditiontotheformalcourts,therearemanyadministrativetribunals,mostofwhichwerecreated
after theSecondWorldWar.Theycontrola vast rangeofactivities from the issuingofpassenger
licences toairlines, to theawardof socialsecurityentitlement.Mostof these tribunalshave their
ownrulesofprocedureandareregulatedbyspecificstatutorycontrols.Nonehaseverbeencreated
bytheCommonLawandmosthavelittlecontactwiththetraditionalcourts,thoughrightsofappeal
from
some
important
tribunals
exist,
either
to
the
High
Court
or
to
the
Court
of
Appeal.
Perhaps
the
bestknownaretheEmploymentTribunals,whichusedtobecalledIndustrialTribunalsuntil1998.
Shouldalsobelistedinthatpanoramaofcourtsthreeothercourtswhich,formallyspeaking,arenot
partoftheEnglishcourtsystemthoughtheyareofsignificantimportancetoit.Thesecourtsarethe
CourtofJusticeoftheEuropeanCommunities,theEuropeanCourtofHumanRights,andtheJudicial
CommitteeofthePrivyCouncil.ThelastmentionedwillbestudiedinsomedetailinChapterTwoof
thepresentcourse(thenewU.K.SupremeCourt).
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
17/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
17
THESOURCESOFANGLOSAXONLAW
CHAPTER TWO:
THE NEW U.K. SUPREME COURT
Introduction
TheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedKingdomisthehighestCourtintheUnitedKingdomandactsasa
finalcourtofappealincasesofmajorpublicimportance.
Itwas
established
by
the
Constitutional
Reform
Act
2005
and
started
work
on
1October
2009.
After
itscreation,theSupremeCourtassumedtheworkoftheLordsofAppeal inOrdinary(LawLords)
whowereresponsibleforthejudicialfunctionsoftheHouseofLords,viaits AppellateCommittee.
Asmembers of theHouse of Lords, the previousjudges sat as Law Lords in Parliament. On the
contrary, thenewSupremeCourt is independentofParliamentbecause itsjudges,calledjustices,
moved out of theHouse of Lords, located in the Houses of Parliament in Westminster and into
MiddlesexGuildhall,aHeritagebuildingclosetoParliamentbutseparate from it,thatwasentirely
refurbishedtohostthestayofthenewcourt.
I. AnewCourtfortheUnitedKingdom
A. EstablishmentoftheSupremeCourt
TheideaofanewSupremeCourtoriginatedintheDepartmentofConstitutionalAffairs(DCA)which,
inits
July
2003
Consultation
Paper,
observed
that
the
time
had
come
to
split
the
judicial
functions
of
theJudicialCommitteeoftheHouseofLordsfromthelegislativefunctionsoftheHouseofLords.1
Itwasargued that thepublicdidnotalwaysunderstand that thedecisionsof theHouseofLords
were only taken by its Appellate Committee and not by nonjudicial members as well. A new
1http://www.dca.gov.uk/consult/supremecourt/#ch1
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
18/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
18
SupremeCourtwouldenhance thejudges impartialityand independence, theConsultationPaper
claimed.ThatiswhythenewpresidentoftheSupremeCourt,LordPhillips,acknowledgedthatthere
wouldbeanexplicitseparationofpowersforthefirsttimeeverintheUnitedKingdom.2
TheUnitedKingdomSupremeCourtwasestablishedbytheConstitutionalReformAct2005,which
canbedividedintothreeparts.ThefirstconcernsthereformoftheofficeoftheLordChancellor,the
secondisaboutthenewSupremeCourt,andthethirdregulatestheappointmentofjudges.
ThelongtitleoftheActisAnActtomakeprovisionformodifyingtheofficeofLordChancellor,and
tomakeprovisionrelatingtothefunctionsofthatoffice;toestablishaSupremeCourtoftheUnited
Kingdom,andtoabolishtheappellatejurisdictionoftheHouseofLords;tomakeprovisionaboutthe
jurisdictionoftheJudicialCommitteeofthePrivyCouncilandthejudicialfunctionsofthePresident
oftheCouncil;tomakeotherprovisionaboutthejudiciary,theirappointmentanddiscipline;andfor
connectedpurposes.
TheBillwasoriginally introducedon24February2004andenvisagedcertainchanges,themainof
whichweretheabolitionoftheofficeof"LordHighChancellorofGreatBritain",generallyknownas
theLordChancellor,thesettingupofaSupremeCourtoftheUnitedKingdomandmovingtheLaw
LordsoutoftheHouseofLordstothisnewcourtandmeasuresrelatingtothejudiciary, including
changestothepositionoftheLordChiefJusticeandchangestothePrivyCouncil.
AftersomeamendmentsbytheLords,theActkeptthepostofLordChancellor,even if itsrolewas
reduced and the office holder was no longer automatically Speaker of the House of Lords. The
ChancellorcannowbefromeithertheHouseofLordsortheHouseofCommons.
Thereis
also
the
new
position
of
Secretary
of
State
for
Constitutional
Affairs
scheduled
by
the
Bill
to
replacetheLordChancellorsoffice.In2007theholderofthisCabinetpostwasrenamedSecretary
ofStateforJustice.HealsoholdstheofficeofLordChancellor.Thisofficewasreformedtoremove
theabilityoftheLordChancellortoactasbothagovernmentministerandajudge.Thisdecisionwas
also influenced by the European Convention on Human Rights. Ajudicial officer, who also has
2http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6251272/NewSupremeCourtopens
withmediabarred.html
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
19/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
19
legislative or executive powers, cannot be in conformity with the requirements of Article 6
(Paragraph1)whichprovidesfortherighttoafairtrial.BothHousesapprovedtheBillon21March
2005,whichreceivedRoyalAssenton24March.
B. TheorganisationoftheSupremeCourt
The United Kingdom Supreme Court consists of twelve permanent Justices. One of them is the
PresidentoftheUnitedKingdomSupremeCourt,anotheroneisitsDeputyPresident.LikeallBritish
judges,SupremeCourtjusticesareforcedtoretireatage70iffirstappointedtoajudicialofficeafter
31March1995oratage75otherwise.TenLordsofAppealinOrdinary(LawLords)holdingofficeon
1October2009becamethefirstjusticesofthe12memberSupremeCourt.The11thplaceonthe
SupremeCourtwasfilledbyLordClarke(formerlyMasteroftheRolls),whowasthefirstJusticeto
beappointeddirectlytotheSupremeCourt..SirJohnDysonbecamethe12thandfinaljusticeofthe
SupremeCourton13April2010.
TheSeniorLawLordon1October2009,LordPhillips,becametheSupremeCourt'sfirstPresident,
andtheSecondSeniorLawLord,LordHopeofCraighead,becamethefirstDeputyPresident.,On30
September2010,LordSavilleofNewdigatebecamethefirstJusticetoretire,followedbyLordCollins
ofMaspeburyon7May2011,althoughthelatterremainedasactingjusticeuntilJuly2011.InJune
2011,LordRodgerbecamethefirstJusticetodieinoffice,afterashortillness.
1.1.1. Actingjudges
InadditiontothetwelvepermanentJustices,thePresidentmayrequestotherseniorjudges,drawn
fromtwo
groups,
to
sit
as
"acting
judges"
of
the
Supreme
Court.
The firstgroup isthosejudgeswhohold 'officeasasenior territorialjudge':judgesof the
CourtofAppealofEnglandandWales,judgesoftheCourtofAppealofNorthernIrelandand
judgesoftheFirstorSecondDivisionoftheInnerHouseoftheCourtofSessioninScotland.
The second group is known as the 'supplementary panel'. The Presidentmay approve in
writingretiredseniorjudges'membershipofthispaneliftheyareunder75yearsofage.
1.1.2. Appointmentsprocess
TheConstitutionalReformAct2005makesprovisionforanewappointmentsprocessforJusticesof
the Supreme Court. A selection commission will be formed when vacancies arise. This will be
composedof
the
President
and
Deputy
President
of
the
Supreme
Court
and
amember
of
the
Judicial
AppointmentsCommissionofEnglandandWales,theJudicialAppointmentsBoardforScotlandand
theNorthern Ireland JudicialAppointments Commission. InOctober 2007, theMinistry of Justice
announcedthatthisappointmentsprocesswouldbeadoptedonavoluntarybasisforappointments
ofLordsofAppealinOrdinary.NewjudgesappointedtotheSupremeCourtafteritscreationwillnot
necessarily receive peerages, however they are given the courtesy title of Lord and Lady upon
appointment.ThePresidentandDeputyPresidentareappointedtothoserolesratherthanbeingthe
mostseniorbytenureinoffice.
1.1.3. Current Just ices
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
20/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
20
Therearecurrently10Justicesandtwovacancies.Asof9August2011,theJustices,inorderof
seniority,areasfollows:
Name Born Almamater Swornin Mandatoryretirement Priorseniorjudicialroles
LordPhillips(President)
21January
1938
(age73)
KingsCollege,
Cambridge
1October
2009
21January
2013
SeniorLordofAppealin
Ordinary(20082009)
LordChief
Justice
of
EnglandandWales
(20052008)
MasteroftheRolls
(20002005)
LordofAppealin
Ordinary(19992000)
LordHope(Deputy
President)
27June
1938
(age73)
StJohn'sCollege,
Cambridge
Universityof
Edinburgh
1October
2009
27June2013
SecondSeniorLordof
AppealinOrdinary(2009)
LordofAppealin
Ordinary(19962009)
LordPresidentofthe
CourtofSession(1989
1996)
LordWalker17March
1938
(age73)
TrinityCollege,
Cambridge
1October
200917March2013
LordofAppealin
Ordinary(20022009)
LordJusticeofAppeal
(19972002)
LadyHale31January
1945
(age66)
GirtonCollege,
Cambridge
1October
2009
31January
2020
LordofAppealin
Ordinary(20042009)
LordJusticeofAppeal
(19992003)
LordBrown9April
1937
(age74)
Worcester
College,Oxford
1October
20099April2012
LordofAppealin
Ordinary(20042009)
LordJusticeofAppeal
(19922004)
LordMance6June
1943
(age68)
University
College,Oxford
1October
20096June2018
LordofAppealin
Ordinary(20052009)
LordJusticeofAppeal
(19992005)
LordKerr22
February
1948
(age63)
Queen's
UniversityBelfast
1October
2009
22February
2023
LordofAppealin
Ordinary(2009)
LordChiefJusticeof
NorthernIreland(2004
2009)
LordClarke13May
1943
(age68)
King'sCollege,
Cambridge
1October
200913May2018
MasteroftheRolls
(20052009)
LordJusticeofAppeal
(19982005)
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
21/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
21
LordDyson31July
1943
(age68)
WadhamCollege,
Oxford
13April
201031July2018
DeputyHeadofCivil
Justice(20032006)
LordJusticeofAppeal
(20012010)
LordWilson 9May1945(age66)
Worcester
College,Oxford
26May
20119May2020
LordJusticeofAppeal
(20052011)
Onenew
Justice
is
yet
to
be
appointed
to
the
Supreme
Court
and
have
his
courtesy
title
announced:
Name Born Almamater Takingoffice MandatoryRetirement
Priorseniorjudicialroles
JonathanSumptionQC
9December
1948
(age62)
Magdalen
College,
Oxford
Atadatetobeagreed
withthePresidentofthe
SupremeCourt
9December
2018None
Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Kingdom
Whenvacanciesarise,theQueenappointsasuccessorwhoisatfirstproposedbythePrimeMinister.
ThisproposalismadebytheLordChancellorincollaborationwithaselectioncommissioncomposed
of the President and Deputy President of the Supreme Court and a member of the Judicial
Appointments Commission of England andWales, a representative of the Judicial Appointments
BoardforScotlandandonefortheNorthernIrishJudicialAppointmentsCommission.
ThepermanentJusticesareappointedforlifeandmustretireattheageof70.ThePresidentofthe
SupremeCourtisalsoabletosummonotherseniorjudgesinadditiontothe12permanentJustices.
TheysitasactingjudgesoftheSupremeCourtandaredrawnfromtwogroups.
The first group isjudgeswho are senior territorialjudgesof the Court ofAppeal of England and
Wales,theCourtofAppealofNorthernIrelandoroftheFirstorSecondDivisionoftheInnerHouse
ofthe
Court
of
Session
in
Scotland.
Thesecondgroupiscalledthesupplementarypanel.ThePresidentcanchooseretiredseniorjudges
membershipof thispanel if theyareunder75yearsofage.TheSupremeCourtalsoconsistsofa
ChiefExecutiveandaRegistrar.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
22/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
22
II. JurisdictionoftheSupremeCourt
A. Cases
TheUnitedKingdom Supreme Court is responsible for the hearingof appeals from courts in the
UnitedKingdoms
three
legal
systems,
i.e.
England
and
Wales,
Scotland
and
Northern
Ireland.
The
SupremeCourt isthehighestcourtforcivilappealsfortheCourtofSession inScotlandbutnotfor
criminallawthatisstillheardinScotland.
ConcerningthepermissiontoappealtheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedKingdom,casesthatarefirst
heardattheCourtofSessiondontrequirepermission.AnycasecanproceedtotheSupremeCourtif
twoAdvocatescertifythatanappealissuitable.
InEnglandandWalesandNorth Ireland,theCourtofAppealora Justice fromtheSupremeCourt
itselfhavetogivethe leavetoappeal.This isduetothe factthattheSupremeCourtsfocus ison
casesthatraisepointsoflawofgeneralpublicimportance.
Other cases that are determined by the Supreme Court are socalled devolution issues. They
concernthe
powers
of
the
three
devolved
administrations,
the
Northern
Ireland
Executive
and
Northern IrelandAssembly, the ScottishGovernment and the Scottish Parliament, and theWelsh
AssemblyGovernmentandtheNationalAssemblyforWales.
MostofthesecasesconcernthecompliancewithrightsundertheEuropeanConventiononHuman
Rightswhichhavebeenincorporatedintonationallawsince1998.
B. TheOfficeofFairTradingvAbbeyNationalplc&Others:an overview
Oneofthe firstcasesheardbythenewSupremeCourtwasthe legalbattlebetweentheOfficeof
FairTrading(OFT)andBritainsbankingsector.
TheOfficeofFairTradingisanonministerialgovernmentdepartmentoftheUnitedKingdomwhich
enforcesconsumerprotectionandcompetitionlaw.TheOFTambitionstomakemarketsworkwell
forthecustomersandtoensureactivecompetitionbetweenfairdealingbusinesses.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
23/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
23
OFT v Abbey National and others is about bank charges in theUnited Kingdom. It concerns the
situationwhere a bank accountholder goes intounauthorisedoverdraft.When abank customer
makes a payment request the bank normally makes the payment as requested and then takes
chargeswhichaccumulateaslongastheunauthorisedoverdraftexists.
According to theOFT, the fees that thebanks take from theirclientsviolated theUnfairTerms in
ConsumerContractsRegulations1999,whichimplementstheEuropeanUnionUnfairContractTerms
Directive.TheOFTalsoarguedthatthefeeswereapenaltyforbreachofcontract.
BeforetheHighCourt,thebankscouldsuccessfullyclaimthatthecontractualtermsinthecontracts
with theirclientswerenotpenal.Anyway theHighCourtdecided that the charges fellwithin the
sphereofactivitiesofthelegislationandthattheirfairnesscouldbeassessedbytheOFT.Afterthis
decisionthebanksappealed.
The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of theHigh Court and decided that the OFT had the
jurisdictiontoassessthe fairnessofthebanks'unplannedoverdraft fees. Inaddition, theCourtof
Appealdenied leave toappeal to theHouseofLords.After thisdecision thebankspetitioned the
HouseofLords(nowtheSupremeCourt)forpermissiontoappeal.
TheHouseofLordsacceptedandthebanksenteredtheirAppealPetitionon6th
April2009.
The newly established Supreme Court handed down itsjudgment on 25th
November 2009 and
unanimouslyfoundinfavourofthebanks.
TheSupremeCourtarguedthatthechargesofabankareacoretermofthecontractsforbank
accounts
and
that
these
charges
are
part
of
the
banks
remuneration.
Therefore,
the
Supreme
Court
decided thatunder theOFTsauthority toassess the termsof fairnessunder theUnfairTerms in
Consumer ContractsRegulations 1999, the unplannedoverdrafts of a bank account couldnot be
assessed.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
24/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
24
TheSupremeCourtarguedthatitspowersweregiventothembythelegislationandthattheycould
donothingeven ifoneconsideredthe termsunfair.According totheSupremeCourt, itwas the
roleofParliamenttoconstruetheEuropeanDirectivemorebroadlytoallowbankclientsortheOFT
tochallengeallegedlyunfaircharges.
That decision reflects the view that the United Kingdoms new highest court has of itself. The
Justicesopinion that theycannotdecideunder thepower vested to thembyParliamentand the
argumentthatlegislativepowerhastodecideoverabroaderenforcementoftheEuropeanDirective
clearlyshowsthattheCourtseesitselfasabodythatisfullyindependentofParliamentandwilling
toseverthebondsbetweenthelegislativeandthejudiciary.
Itdemonstratesthattheconcernofsomepeoplethattherewasnoeffectiveseparationofpowersin
theUnitedKingdom(seeabove)wastakenseriouslyandthatthereisanewwayofmakingdecisions
whichshows
that
the
United
Kingdoms
Supreme
Court
is
no
longer
influenced
by
the
Lords
that
keeptheirpostsintheHouseofLordsandwhoarenonjudicialmembersofParliament.
C. OFTv.AbbeyNational:theTimeslawreport
2. OFT cannot reviewbankschargeson unauthorisedcurrentaccount
overdrafts
SupremeCourt
PublishedNovember26,2009
OfficeofFairTradingvAbbeyNationalplcandOthers
BeforeLordPhillipsofWorthMatravers,President,LordWalkerofGestingthorpe,BaronessHaleofRichmond,
LordManceandLordNeubergerofAbbotsbury
JudgmentNovember25,2009
Charges
levied
by
banks
on
personal
current
account
customers
in
respect
of
unauthorised
overdrafts were part of a package of consideration for the package of banking services
provided and accordingly their fairness was exempt from review by the Office of Fair
Trading.
The Supreme Court allowed an appeal by AbbeyNational plc and other banks from the
dismissalbytheCourtofAppeal(SirAnthonyClarke,MasteroftheRolls,LordJusticeWaller,
VicePresident,and Lord Justice Lloyd) (TheTimesMarch3,2009; [2009]2WLR1286)of
their appeal from Mr Justice Andrew Smith (The Times April 29, 2008; [2008] 2 All ER
(Comm)625)whohaddeclared,onaclaimbytheOFT,thatanassessmentofthefairnessof
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
25/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
25
the charges was not prohibited by regulation 6(2)(b) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer
ContractsRegulations(SI1999No2083).
Mr JonathanSumption,QCandMrAndrewMitchell forBarclaysBankplc;MrGeoffreyVos,QCandMiss
SoniaTolaneyforNationwideBuildingSociety;MrRichardBrentforAbbeyNationalplc;MrRichardSalter,QC
andMr JohnOdgers forClydesdaleBankplc;MrRobinDicker,QC forHBOSplc;MrMarkHoskins,QC,Mr
DanielToledano,QCandMrPatrickGoodallforHSBCBankplc;MrBankimThanki,QCandMrJamesDuffyfor
LloydsTSBBankplc;MrLaurenceRabinowitz,QCandMrDavidBlayneyforTheRoyalBankofScotlandGroup
plc;MrJonathanCrow,QC,MrRichardColeman,MissJemimaStratfordandMissSarahLovefortheOfficeof
FairTrading.
LORDWALKER said that the banks accepted that the system of freeifincredit banking prevalent in this
countryinvolvedamassivecrosssubsidy,amountingtoabout30percentofthebankstotalrevenuestream
fromcurrentaccountcustomers,providedbythosecustomerswhoregularlyincurredchargesforunauthorised
overdrafts,about12millionpeople,tothosecustomers,about42million,whoneverorveryrarely incurred
suchcharges.Somewouldregardthatsystemasbeing,insomesenseatleast,obviouslyunfair.Thatdepended
partly on whether one regarded the average customer who incurred unauthorised overdraft charges as
spendthriftandimprovidentorasdisadvantagedandfindingithardtomakebothendsmeet.
TheCourthadbeen told thattherehadbeenmanythousandsof individualclaims in thecountycourt,allor
virtually all of which had been stayed to await the outcome of the present proceedings. The volume of
litigation spoke for itself as to the dissatisfaction felt by many thousands of customers affected by the
challengedcharges.
ButwhetherthesystemwasfairwasnotthequestionfortheCourt.Thatwaswhetherasamatteroflawits
fairnesscouldbechallengedbytheOFTasexcessiveinrelationtotheservicessuppliedtothecustomers.
Thatdependedonthecorrectinterpretation,initsEuropeancontext,andapplicationofregulation6(2)ofthe
1999Regulations, whichprovided:
Insofarasitisinplainintelligiblelanguage,theassessmentoffairnessofatermshallnotrelate(a)tothe
definitionofthemainsubjectmatterofthecontract,or(b)totheadequacyofthepriceorremuneration,as
againstthegoodsorservicessuppliedinexchange.
The
context
required
adequacy
to
be
read
in
the
sense
of
appropriateness:
see
per
Lord
Rodger
of
EarlsferryinDirectorGeneralofFairTradingvFirstNationalBankplc(TheTimesNovember1,2001;[2002]1
AC481,paragraph64).
The1999Regulationshadbeenmade to transpose intonational lawCouncilDirective93/13/EECofApril5,
1993onunfairtermsinconsumercontracts(OJ1993L95/29).Regulation6(2)followedcloselytheEnglishtext
ofarticle4(2)oftheDirective.TheLawLordshadalreadyconsideredarticle4(2)intheFirstNationalBankcase.
Therewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenarticle4(2)andregulation6(2).
ThegeneralthrustofMrSumptionssubmissionswasthatthejudgeandtheCourtofAppealhadadoptedan
overcomplicated approach to an issue that, however important, was ultimately quite a short point of
construction.Article4(2)wasexpressed infairlysimpleandnontechnical language,aswasappropriatefora
Communitymeasurethathadtobeappliedacrossavarietyofnationalsystemsofcontractlaw.Itrepresented
a
compromise
between
consumer
protection
and
freedom
of
contract.
His
Lordship
saw
force
in
Mr
Sumptions
criticisms.
Asupplyofservicesmightbesimple,oritmightbecomposite,aswhenonestayedatahotelofferingawide
varietyofservices.Therewasnoprincipledbasisonwhich the court coulddecide that some serviceswere
moreessential to the contract thanothers.Themain subjectmatterhad tobedescribed ingeneral terms:
hotelservices.Theservicesthatbanksofferedtotheircurrentaccountcustomerswereacomparablepackage
ofservices,whichincludedthecollectionandpaymentofcheques,othermoneytransmissionservices,facilities
forcashdistributionandtheprovisionofstatements.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
26/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
26
Whenoneturnedtotheotherpartofthequidproquoofaconsumercontract,thepriceorremuneration,the
difficultyofdecidingwhichpriceswereessentialwasthesame,andregulation6(2)(b)containednoindication
thatonlyanessentialpriceorremunerationwasrelevant.
Anymonetarypriceor remunerationpayableunder thecontractwouldnaturally fallwithin the languageof
paragraph(b).Justasbankingservicestocurrentaccountcustomerscouldaptlybedescribedasapackage,so
could the consideration thatmoved from the customer to thebank.An importantpartof thatpackage for
customerswhosecurrentaccountswereincreditwastheinterestforgonebythemsincetheywouldreceivea
very low rate;overdraft interest and chargeswere themost importantelement for thosewhowerenot in
credit.
TherelevanttermintheFirstNationalBankcasehadbeenadefaultprovision,andtradersoughtnottobeable
tooutflankconsumersbydrafting themselves intoapositionwhere theycould take advantageofadefault
provision,butinhisLordshipsviewthetermsandchargesinquestioninthepresentcasefellsquarelywithin
regulation6(2)(b).
Astotheapplicationofregulation6(2),properlyconstrued,tothefacts,chargesforunauthorisedoverdrafts
were monetary consideration for the package of banking services supplied to personal current account
customers.Theywereanimportantpartofthebankschargingstructure.Thefactsthattheywerecontingent
andthatthemajorityofcustomersdidnot incurthemwere irrelevant.Thefairnessofthechargeswouldbe
exemptfromreviewinpointofappropriatenesseveniffewercustomerspaidthemandtheyformedasmaller
partofthebanksrevenuestream.
LordPhillipsdeliveredajudgmentagreeingwithLordWalker;LordMancedeliveredaconcurringjudgment;
LadyHale,inashortjudgment,andLordNeubergeragreedwithLordWalkerandLordMance.
Solicitors:Simmons&Simmons;Slaughter&May;AshurstLLP;AddleshawGoddardLLP;Allen&OveryLLP;
FreshfieldsBruckhausDeringerLLP;LovellsLLP;LinklatersLLP;MsWinnieChing.
D.QuestionsandanswersontheU.K.SupremeCourt
UKSupremeCourt:Q&A
ByDominicCasciani,BBCNewshomeaffairs
WhatistheUKSupremeCourt?
It isthenewhighestcourt intheUnitedKingdom,actingasafinalcourtofappeal incasesofmajorpublic
importance.Whatthatmeansinpracticeisthatits12justiceswillbethe"finalarbiters"betweencitizensand
theState,theultimatecheckandbalancethatlawiscorrectly,andfairly,applied.
Isthisanentirelynewconcept?
In thewordsof LordPhillips, the firstpresidentof theSupremeCourt, this isa caseof changing the form
ratherthansubstance.ThecaseworkthatwillbedealtwithbytheSupremeCourtisexactlythesameasthat
whichcamebeforethejusticeswhentheysatasLawLords inParliament.Buttheseseniorjudgeshavenow
left the House of Lords and are therefore independent of Parliament. This separation brings the United
Kingdomintolinewithmanycomparablemodernstates.ItmeanstheSupremeCourtbecomesthefinalpillar
intheconstitution:Parliamentcreateslaws,thegovernmentandpublicbodiesusethoselaws andthecourts
monitortheirapplication.
ArethejusticesstillLords?
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
27/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
27
No.While theyretain the title thatcamewith theirpeerage, theywillnowbeknownas the Justicesof the
SupremeCourt.ThosewhoretiremaybeabletoreturntotheHouseofLords.
Whatkindsofcaseswilltheyhear?
TheSupremeCourtwillgivethefinalverdictinalltypesofcasesintheUnitedKingdom,otherthancriminal
matters in Scotland. The justices will also offer opinions on major points of law and play a part in the
developmentoflawaroundtheworld.ThejusticeswillhearsomecasesfromtheCommonwealth.Thejustices
willalsoresolveany legaldisputescausedbydevolution toScotland,WalesandNorthern Ireland.Thecourt
willdeal
only
with
cases
that
the
justices
consider
to
be
the
most
important.
Their
rulings
will
be
limited,
as
now,toasmallnumberofcasestheyknowwillhavefarreachingimplications.
Whathasitruledoninthepast?
In 2004, Laws Lords ruled that the government could not hold foreign terrorist suspects without charge
indefinitely amajorblowtogovernmentsecuritypolicy.Thefollowingyear,theLawLordsupheldabanon
huntingwithdogs, legislationthathaddividedParliament.In1993,theLawLordsgavedoctorspermissionto
withdrawlifesupportingmedicationfromTonyBland,afootballsupporterwhohadsufferedirreversiblebrain
damageduringtheHillsboroughdisaster.ThelastcaseheardbytheLawLordswasthatofDebbiePurdy,the
MSpatient,whowonhercallforgreaterlegalclarityonassistedsuicide.
HowdoesthecourtrelatetoEurope?
ThecourthasaroleininterpretinglawpassedinthenameoftheEuropeanUnionand,separately,ensuring
that theBritish courts take intoaccount rulings from theEuropeanCourtofHumanRights. Somepeople
whose casesare rejectedby theSupremeCourtwillbeable toask theEuropeanCourt to intervenewhere
thereneedstobemoreclarityonspecificareasofhumanrights.
Howdothejusticesmaketheirrulings?
Thereisalwaysanoddnumberofjusticessothattherecanbeaclearmajorityonewayortheother.Justices
haveeachtoreachtheirownconclusionsandthenwritetheirlegalopinion.Caseswilltypicallybeheardby
five
justices,
and
the
most
important
cases
will
involve
nine.
HowdothejusticescomparewiththeirUSnamesakes?
The US Supreme Court can strike down a law as unconstitutional but the UK has no codified, written
constitution. IftheBritishjusticessaythata law iswrong,thenthegovernmentknows itmusteventually
bringthematterbeforeMPsforreform.Butthatdoesn'tmeanthedisputedlawistornupbeforeParliament
hashadtimetothink itthrough.Themost importantrecentexampleofthisconstitutional arrangementwas
the Law Lords' 2004 decision on indefinite detention of terrorist suspects without charge. The suspects
remained inprisonwhileParliamentpushedthrough legislationtochangethesystemandallowtheirrelease
andmonitoringinthecommunity.
SoisthereanypracticaldifferencebetweentheLordsandthejustices?
Although theconstitutional differencesaresubtle, thenewjusticeshopetheywillnowplayagreaterpublic
roleinthelifeofthenation.TheircourtsitsinWestminsteroppositetheHousesofParliamentandisopento
thepublic. Ithasacafeandeducationsuite.TheLawLords'judgementswere televised,because theywere
deliveredintheHouseofLords.ButalloftheSupremeCourt'shearingswillbeopentothepublicand,forthe
firsttimeinBritishlegalhistory,televisioncameraswillbepermanentlyincourt.
Howwillthejusticesbeappointed?
TobecomeaSupremeCourtjusticeyoumusthavebeenaseniorjudgeforatleasttwoyearsoraqualified
lawyerforatleast15years.Whenthereisavacancy,thejusticesecretary,alsoknownastheLordChancellor,
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
28/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
28
willsetupaselectioncommission.Itwillconsultseniorjudgeswhoarenotputtingthemselvesforwardforthe
court, alongwith thejustice secretaryand key figures inScotland,WalesandNorthern Ireland.Thejustice
secretarycanacceptor rejectanomination.Theprimeminister thenmakesa final recommendation to the
Queen,whomakestheappointment.
Doesthatmeantherewillbealotofcourtroomdrama?
TheSupremeCourtjobistoexaminethefinerpartsofthelawanditsapplication.Itisnotthekindofthingthat
lends itself todramaticcourtroomflourishes.Thatdoesn'tmean thecaseswillnotbedramatic in theirown
ways.Their
first
case
in
October
concerns
how
the
government
freezes
the
assets
of
terrorism
suspects.
A
futurecaseinvolvesaformerMI5officerwhowantstopublishhismemoirs.
HowmuchdoestheSupremeCourtcost?
Therehasbeena59mprogrammetorenovatetheMiddlesexGuildhallandturnitintotheSupremeCourt.A
further18mhasbeenspentonnewcourtsforthecriminalcasesmovedfromthebuildingtoanotherlocation.
TheMinistryofJusticesaystheSupremeCourtwillcostabout13.5mayeartorun.
StoryfromBBCNEWS:Published:2009/09/3023:09:57GMT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/
/2/hi/uk_news/8283967.stm
E)TheJudicialCommitteeofthePrivyCouncil
MentionmustbemadeofthatCourtinconnectionwiththeSupremeCourtsinceit ishousedinthesamebuildingasthe
Supreme Court Court 3 in MiddlesexGuildhall is the normal location for Privy Council hearings and Supreme Court
justicesarecalledontositonthePrivyCouncilaswell.
PrivyCouncil
Established 1833
Jurisdiction CertainmembersoftheCommonwealthofNations
Location MiddlesexGuildhall,London
Authorizedby HMGovernmentviatheJudicialCommitteeAct1833
Website www.jcpc.gov.uk
TheJudicial
Committee
of
the
Privy
Council
(JCPC)
is
one
of
the
highest
courts
in
the
United
Kingdom.
Established
by
the
JudicialCommitteeAct1833tohearappealsformerlyheardbytheKinginCouncil(s.3),itisthehighestcourtofappealfor
several independentCommonwealthcountries,aswellas for theUnitedKingdom'soverseas territories,and theBritish
CrownDependencies. It isoften referred toas thePrivyCouncil,as inmostcasesappealsaremade to"HerMajesty in
Council" (i.e. theBritishmonarchas formallyadvisedbyherPrivyCounsellors),who then refers thecase to the Judicial
Committee for"advice";the"report"oftheJudicialCommittee isalwaysacceptedbytheQueen inCouncilasjudgment.
Thepanelofjudges(typicallyfiveinnumber)hearingaparticularcaseisknownas"theBoard".
InCommonwealth republics retaining the JCPC as their final courtof appeal, appealsaremadedirectly to the Judicial
Committeeitself.InthecaseofBrunei,appealsaremadetotheSultanofBrunei,whothenrefersthecasetotheJudicial
Committeeforadvice.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
29/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
29
FormerlytheJudicialCommitteegaveaunanimousreport,butsincethe1960sdissentingopinionshavebeenallowed. In
July2007,theJudicialCommitteeheldthatithadthepowertodepartfromprecedentif itconcludedthatoneofitsown
previousdecisionswasincorrect.
The JudicialCommittee'spermanenthome is inLondon, in theUnitedKingdom.On1October2009, itmoved from the
PrivyCouncilChamber,inDowningStreet,totheformerMiddlesexGuildhallbuilding,whichhadbeenrefurbishedin2007
toprovideahomeforboththeJCPCandthenewlycreatedSupremeCourtoftheUnitedKingdom.
ThejudicialsystemoftheUnitedKingdomisunusualinhavingnosinglehighestnationalcourt;theJudicialCommittee is
thehighestcourtofappealinsomecases,whileinmostothersthehighestcourtofappealistheUKSupremeCourt.
InScotlandthehighestcourtincriminalcasesistheHighCourtofJusticiary;theUKSupremeCourtisthehighestcourtin
civil cases and matters arising from Scottish devolution, the latter previously having been dealt with by the Judicial
Committee.
JudgmentsoftheJudicialCommitteearenotgenerallybindingoncourtswithintheUnitedKingdom,havingonlypersuasive
authority,butarebindingonallcourtswithinanyotherCommonwealthcountryfromwhichanappealisheard.
FromWikipedia,thefreeencyclopedia
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
30/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
30
SOURCES OF ANGLO-SAXON LAW :CHAPTER THREETHE RULE OF LAWIntroduction
IntheirPrinciplesoftheEnglishLegalSystem(3rd
edition,1997),GarySlapperandDavidKellyclaim(p.11):
The Rule of Law represents a symbolic ideal against which proponents of widely divergent political persuasionsmeasure or criticise the shortcomings of contemporary State practice.
Theyinsistonthelackofprecisioninthedefinitionoftheconcept,whichhaschangedovertimeandaccording
tothesocietalandpoliticalviewsofthosetacklingthesubject.Theyalsoclaimthat
Itisundeniablethattheformandcontentoflawandlegalprocedurehavechangedsubstantiallyinthecourse
of the20th
century. ()As theState increasingly tookover the regulationofmanyareasofsocialactivity, it
delegated wideranging discretionary powers to various people and bodies in an attempt to ensure the
successfulimplementation ofitspolicies.TheassumptionanddelegationofsuchpoweronthepartoftheState
brought it intopotentialconflictwithpreviousunderstandingof theRuleofLawwhichhadentailedastrictly
limitedambitofStateactivity.(p.11)
Today,itiscommonlyadmittedthattheRuleofLawisthefundamentaldoctrinethatallmenareequalbefore
thelawregardlessofappointmentorofficialstatus.Inherentthemeaningoftheruleoflawisthatthereisno
arbitraryjusticeorexerciseofarbitrarypower.(Reference:www.gilhams.com/dictionary/314.cfm)
DefinitionsofruleoflawontheWeb(Googlesearch):
astateoforderinwhicheventsconformtothelaw
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
thedoctrinethatnoindividualisabovethelawandthateveryonemustanswertoit
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rule_of_law
Theprinciplethateverymemberofasociety,evenaruler,mustfollowthelaw.
instech.tusd.k12.az.us/Core/glossary/ssglossary.doc
Allgovernment
officials
and
all
private
citizens
must
follow
the
laws
of
the
nation
and
must
be
treated
equallyunderthelaw.Thegovernmentiscreatedbyandforthepeopleandisanswerabletothe
people.
cooscurrycourts.org/glossaryofterms/index.htm
Oneofthecornerstonesofdemocraticsociety,meaningthateveryoneissubjecttothelaw.Itisnot
justtherulethateveryoneiscoveredbytheCriminalCodeandmustbechargedandconvictedif
appropriate....
bitbucket.icaap.org/dict.pl
anotherphraseforlawandorder;theprinciplesthatrequirethatthepowersofthestatebederived
fromandlimitedeitherbylegislation...
www.manitobacourts.mb.ca/definitions.html
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
31/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
31
Alegalsysteminwhichrulesareclear,wellunderstood,andfairlyenforced,includingpropertyrights
andenforcementofcontracts.
wwwpersonal.umich.edu/~alandear/glossary/r.html
Predominanceoflawoverthediscretionaryauthorityofpublicofficials.
www.csa.com/discoveryguides/terror/gloss.php
theextenttowhichagentshaveconfidence inandabidebytherulesofsociety,andinparticularthe
qualityofcontractenforcement,thepolice...
www.peacebuildinginitiative.org/index.cfm
ThereisawidearrayofopinionsconcerningthemeaningoftheRuleoflaw,assaidpreviouslyandascanbe
seenfromthedefinitionsabove.Weshallstudysomeoftheprominentviewsoftheconcept,startingwiththe
classicists,that istosayAVDiceyandFriedrichvonHayek, thenweshallreviewmorecontemporary and/or
progressiveopinionsabout theRuleofLawandweshallroundup thechapterby focusingonMaxWebers
pointofviewonthesubject.
2.1 Theclassicistsviews
2.1.1 AVDicey
AccordingtoAlbertVennDicey(18351922),whowroteTheLawoftheConstitution in1885,theRuleofLaw
wasoneofthekeycharacteristicsthatdistinguishedtheEnglishconstitutionfromitscontinentalcounterparts.
FromDiceys standpoint, theEnglishmanenjoyed theprotectionof theRuleof LawwhileotherEuropeans
werestillsubjecttoarbitrarypower.
AccordingtoDicey,threeingredientswereneededfortheRuleofLawtoexist:
AnabsenceofarbitrarypoweronthepartoftheState.TheextentoftheStatespowerandtheway
in which it exercises such power are limited and controlled by law. Such control is aimed at
preventingtheStatefromacquiringandusingwidediscretionarypowers,becausetheproblemwith
discretion is that it can be exercised in an arbitrary fashion, and that above all is to be feared,
accordingtoDicey.
Equalitybeforethe law.Thefactthatnoperson isabovethe law, irrespectiveofclassorrank.This
was linkedwiththefactthatthoseservingtheState,thecivilservants,aresubjecttothesame law
andlegalproceduresasordinaryprivatecitizens.
Supremacyofordinary law.ThisrelatedtothefactthattheEnglishconstitutionwastheproductof
theordinarylawofthelandandwasbasedontheprovisionofremediesbythecourtsratherthanon
thedeclarationofrightsintheformofawrittenconstitution.
Diceywaswritingfromaparticularpoliticalperspectivethatconsideredthemaintenanceofindividualproperty
and individual freedom a top priority. He was opposed to any increase in State activity in the pursuit of
collectiveinterests.Diceysversionof theRuleofLawveneratedformalequalityattheexpenseofsubstantive
equality.Saiddifferently,hethoughtthatthelawandtheStateshouldbeblindtotherealconcretedifferences
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
32/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
32
that exist between people, in terms ofwealth or power or connection, and should treat them equally, as
possessorsofabstractrightsandduties.
In Diceys work, the Rule of Law was only one of two fundamental elements of the English system of
government: theotherwasparliamentary sovereignty.Therefore, if thegovernment controls the legislative
process,bycommandingastrongmajority inbothchambers,thesovereigntyofParliament isreducedtothe
undisputedsupremacyofcentralgovernment.Atensionstemsfromthefactthat,whereastheRuleofLawwas
aimedatcontrollingarbitrarypower,Parliamentcould,withinthisconstitutionalstructure,pave theway for
such arbitrarypowerbypassing appropriate legislation.Such a situation is specific to theBritish versionof
liberalgovernment.
2.1.2 FriedrichvonHayek
Hayek followed inDiceys footsteps in considering the crucial component of the Rule of Law as being the
absence
of
arbitrary
power
in
the
hands
of
the
State.
Hayek,
who
was
a
harsh
critic
of
the
interventionist
State,
devotedthewholeofthesixthchapterofTheRoadtoSerfdom(RoutledgeClassics,London&NewYork,2001),
hismasterpiece,tothedetailedexaminationoftheconcept.
According toHayek,thepresenceorabsenceof theRuleofLaw isthemaincriterionbywhichto tella free
countryfromonethatisnot.AcountryenjoyingthebenefitoftheRuleofLawisoneinwhichthegovernment
inallitsactionsisboundbyrulesfixedandannouncedbeforehandruleswhichmakeitpossibletoforesee...
howtheauthoritywilluseitscoercivepowersingivencircumstances,andtoplanonesindividualaffairsonthe
basisofthisknowledge.(pp.756)
Under theRuleofLaw, the individual enjoys the freedom to pursuehispersonalendsanddesireswithout
fearing government interference to frustrate his efforts. In the economic field,wemay find two types of
societies:theone inwhich,withinaglobalandstable framework, individualswilldecideforthemselves, the
otherwhereeconomicactivitywillbeguidedbyacentralauthority.
Inthelattertype,thegovernmentdirectstheuseofthemeansofproductiontoparticularends.Intheformer
one,formalrules...areintendedtobemerelyinstrumentalinthepursuitofpeoplesvariousindividualends.
(p.76)Inthecollectivistsystem,theplanningauthoritycannottieitselfdowninadvancetogeneralandformal
ruleswhichpreventarbitrariness. Itmustprovide for theactualneedsof thepeopleas theyariseand then
choosedeliberately
between
them.
(p.
77)
Ifthegovernmenthastodecidehowmanypigsaretoberaisedorhowmanybusesshouldrun,suchdecisions
are bound to depend on the circumstances of the moment and not deduced from general principles.
Furthermore,suchdecisionmakingentailscomparingthevariousinterestsofvariouspersonsandgroupsand,
eventually,someonewillhavetosaywhoseinterestsprevail.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
33/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
33
Therefore, a new distinction of rank will emerge. The distinction between formal law or justice and
substantive rules isvital. It is thesameas thatbetween layingdownaRuleof theRoad,as in theHighway
Code,andorderingpeoplewheretogo.Hayekcontendsthatformalrulesaresuperiortoothersinthesense
thattheydonotinvolveachoicebetweenparticularendsorparticularpeople.(p.78)
Thereare
two
arguments
in
favour
of
formal
rules.
The
former
is
economic.
If
individuals
are
to
make
informed,
rationalchoices,theactionsoftheStatemustbepredictable,mustbedeterminedbyrulesfixedindependently
of the concrete circumstances which can neither be foreseen nor taken into account beforehand. If,
conversely,theStatecontrolledpeoplesactions,itsactionswouldhavetobedecidedonthebasisofthefull
circumstancesofthemomentandwouldthereforebeunpredictable.
(p.79)
Thelatterargument,ofamoralandpoliticalnature,isyetrelevanttothedemonstration.Generalrules,Hayek
argues, must be intended to operate in largely unpredictable circumstances. Therefore, their effect on
particularends
or
particular
people
cannot
be
known
in
advance
and
In
aworld
where
everything
was
preciselyforeseen,thestatecouldhardlydoanythingandremainimpartial.(p.80)
Acounterargumentmightbethattheeconomicplannerneednotandshouldnotbeguidedbyhisindividual
prejudices,butcouldrelyonthegeneralconvictionofwhatisfairandreasonable.However,Hayekclaims,the
moreplanningthereis,themoreitisnecessarytoqualifylegalprovisions...byreferencetowhatisfairor
reasonable i.e. leave the decision of the concrete case ... to the discretion of thejudge or authority in
question.
Onecould
write
ahistory
of
the
decline
of
the
Rule
of
Law...
in
terms
of
the
progressive
introduction
of
these
vagueformulaeintolegislationandjurisdiction,andoftheincreasingarbitrarinessanduncertaintyof,andthe
consequentdisrespectfor,thelawandthejudicature.(p.81)
Inshort,planningnecessarilyinvolvesdeliberatediscriminationbetweenparticularneedsordifferentpeople.
Itmeansineffectareturntotheruleofstatus,areversalofthemovementofprogressivesocietieswhichhas
hithertobeenamovementfromstatustocontract.(p.82)
LiberalismandtheRuleofLaw
Thenotionoflaissezfaire,Hayeksays,hasbeenmisunderstoodasmeaningthattheState
shouldnotactatall,whichisnotthecase.Everystatemustact,butnotalways:
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
34/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
34
...thestatecontrollingweightsandmeasures...iscertainlyacting,whilethestatepermittingtheuseofviolence,
forexample,bystrikepickets,isinactive.Yet,itisinthefirstcasethatthestateobservesliberalprinciplesand
inthesecondthatitdoesnot.(p.84)
TheRuleofLawwasevolvedduring the liberalage, that is the18th
century,andmaybeoneof itsgreatest
achievements:
Manisfreeifheneedstoobeynopersonbutsolelythelaws.ImmanuelKant(17241804)
(Hayekp.85)
Governmentalactionmaybelegal,butnotnecessarilyinagreementwiththeRuleofLaw:
Itmay well be that Hitler has obtained his unlimitedpowers in a strictly constitutionalmanner and that
whateverhedoesisthereforelegalinthejuridicalsense.ButwhowouldsuggestforthatreasonthattheRule
ofLawstillprevailsinGermany?(p.85)
Themost arbitrary rule can bemade legal if the government is given unlimited powers and in thisway a
democracymaysetupthemostcompletedespotismimaginable.(p.86)TheRuleofLawthusimplieslimitsto
the scope of legislation.(p. 87) The limitations of the powers of legislation imply the recognition of the
inalienable right of the individual, inviolable rights of man. (p.88)
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
35/117
2.2OthertheoriesoftheRuleofLaw
2.2.1EPThomson
Unlike Dicey andHayek, Thomson is not a conservative, in the traditional political sense. Indeed, he is a
Marxisthistorian,but, likeDiceyandHayek,heseestheRuleof lawasaprotectionagainsttheencroaching
powerofthemodernState.
ThomsonsharesHayeksfearoftheeverexpandingStateandthewaytheWelfareStatehasintervenedinthe
dailylivesofitscitizens.FromThomsonsperspective,however,theproblemstemsnotsomuchfromthefact
thattheStateisunderminingthefreeoperationofthemarketeconomy,butfromthewayinwhichtheState
hasused itscontroloverthe legislativeprocesstounderminecivil liberties inthepursuitofitsownvisionof
thepublicgood.
InWhigsandHunters(1975),thesubjectofwhichisthemanipulationof lawbythelandedclassesinthe18th
century,ThomsonconcludesthattheRuleofLawisnotjustanecessarymeansoflimitingthepotentialabuse
ofpowerbutthat:
TheRuleofLaw, itself,the imposingofeffective inhibitionsuponpowerandthedefenceofthecitizenfrom
powersallintrusiveclaims,seemstomeanunqualifiedhumangood.
SuchaconclusionclearlyshowsthatThomsonconcurswithHayek sviewthattheRuleofLawgoesbeyond
themererequirementthatthelawshouldbemadethroughtheappropriatelegalinstitutions.
2.2.2 JosephRaz
Some legalphilosophershave recognised theneed forState intervention incontemporarysocietyandhave
providedwaysofunderstandingtheRuleofLawasameansofcontrollingdiscretion(i.e.discretionarypower)
withoutattemptingtoeradicateitcompletely.JosephRaz,inanarticleentitledTheRuleofLawanditsVirtue
(1972) intheLawQuarterlyReviewn93,for instance,claimsthatthepursuitofsocialgoalsmayrequirethe
enactmentofparticularaswellasgenerallaws.Hesuggeststhatitwouldbepracticallyimpossibleforlawto
consistonlyofgeneralrules.
8/13/2019 Source Du Droit Anglo-Saxon
36/117
SourceduDroitanglosaxon CHEYRithy&SergeBASSET
36
RazevencriticisesHayekfordisguisingapoliticalargumentasalegaloneinordertoattackpolicieswhichhe
didnotapproveof.Yet,atthesametime,RazalsoseestheRuleofLawasessentiallyanegativevalue,acting
tominimisethedangerthatcanfollowtheexerciseofdiscretionarypowerinanarbitraryway.Inthatrespect,
byseekingtocontroltheexerciseofdiscretion,hesharescommongroundwithDicey,HayekandThomson.
Raz argues that the basic requirement from which the wider idea of the Rule of Law emerges is the
requirementthat
the
law
must
be
capable
of
guiding
the
individuals
behaviour.
According
to
him,
some
importantprinciplesmaybederivedfromthisgeneralidea:
Lawsshouldbeprospectiveratherthanretroactive.Peoplecannotbeguidedbyorexpectedtoobey
lawswhichhavenotasyetbeenintroduced.Lawsshouldbedraftedinaclearwaytoenablecitizens
tounderstandthemandguidetheiractionsaccordingly.
Lawsshouldnotbechangedtoofrequentlyasthismight leadtoconfusionastowhatwasactually
coveredbythelaw.
Thereshouldbeclearrulesandproceduresinordertomakelaws.
Theindependence ofthejudiciaryhastobeguaranteedtomakesurejudgesarefreetodecidecases
inlinewiththelawandnotinresponsetoanyexternalpressure.
Theprinciplesofnaturaljusticeshouldbeobserved,requiringanopenandfairhearingtobegivento
allpartiestoproceedings.
Thecourtsshouldhavethepowertoreviewthewayinwhichtheotherprinciplesareimplemented
toensuretheyarebeingoperatedasdemandedbytheRuleofLaw.
Thecourtsshouldbeeasilyaccessibleastheyremainattheheartofthe ideaofmakingdiscretion
subjecttolegalcontrol.
Thediscretionofthecrimepreventingagenciesshouldnotbeallowedtopervertthelaw.
AccordingtoRaz,thereistheRuleofLawiftheproceduralrulesoflawmakingarecompliedwithsubjecttoa
numberofsafeguards.Moreover,byseeingthecourtsashavinganessentialparttoplayinhisversionofthe
RuleofLaw,Razmaybeclassifiedasanadvocateofthenotionofjudicialreview.
2.2.3 RobertoUnger
InLawandModernSociety
Top Related