Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
Precedent - Traditionally judges had to rely solely on the precise wording of statutes when applying the law to factual cases.
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Mon Jun 19 2006
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
a) Traditionally judges had to rely solely on the precise wording of statutes when applying the law to factual cases. Parliamentary intention could not be scrutinised through examination of its debates, and external bodies of expertise in particular areas were not solicited for their general observations or comments. Over the course of the previous decade there has been a movement towards the acceptance of external aids to assist judges in interpreting statutes. This began with the crucial case of Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v. Hart [1993] A.C.593. Although the law is not entirely clear to what extent external aids are permitted in which circumstances, Lord Browne-Wilkinson did attempt to restrict its use in his judgement in Pepper, to where the "legislation is ambiguous or obscure, or leads to an absurdity" (at p640). In the case under consideration, Regina v. Bournewood Community and Mental Health N.H.S. Trust, ex Parte L. [1999]...
Get instant access
- Instant, unlimited access to our documents in full
- Swap your work for free access, or pay £4.99
- To see the full version of this document and 147,219 others
Receive email updates for this category
- Simply tell us your email address and receive a weekly Study Help Email for FREE
- Receive 3 FREE essay views with each email
- Get all the latest essays from Coursework.Info & discussion from TheStudentRoom.co.uk
