Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
"The decisions in Brown, Wilson, and Emmett show that, in criminal law at least, the principles of precedent and statutory interpretation do little to stop the higher judiciary developing the law as they wish." Discuss.
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:
Criminal Law Semester Two Essay "The decisions in Brown, Wilson, and Emmett show that, in criminal law at least, the principles of precedent and statutory interpretation do little to stop the higher judiciary developing the law as they wish." Discuss. The principle of precedent within law refers to a case 'decided on the basis of an earlier case'1. Although a power held by the 'higher judiciary' is that they are paid to pass decisions based on their opinions on cases, the Law has endeavoured to constrain this power with the implementation of precedent and statutory interpretation. Precedent intends to define the decision of a case, based upon the facts of a similar case, with exceptions. For example, in the case of Elliott v C. (A Minor)2, the judges felt bound by the facts of R. v Caldwell3. In the earlier case, Caldwell had set fire to a hotel upon having a grudge...
To see the full version of this document, and 145,348 others
