LA2 WJEC exam 2nd June

OP

Im hoping that judiciary, law reform, magistrates or delegated legislation will come up! I think there is a chance magistrates will come up because we haven't seen the question for 3 years

Reply 42

Bucky Barnes

Original post by inspirationhitme

Does anyone understand what the European Community Law is and what the hell direct applicability is? I am stuck on them.

When an EU law is directly applicable it means that national parliaments do not need to enact any legislation to make it law in member states e.g. EU treaties and EU regulations - they don’t need any Acts of Parliament to make them into law in their member states.

I think that European Community Law is the same as European Union Law, which is a group of treaties and legislation which has either a direct or indirect effect on the laws of EU member states. So far as English law is concerned, all treaties signed by our head of government become part of our English law automatically as a result of the European Communities Act 1972. This means citizens of the EU are able to rely on principles of the treaties even if they have not been enacted into English law - this then links in with direct applicability. You can illustrate this with the case of Van Duyn v Home Office ECJ 1974.

I hope that helps!

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 43

OP

Do we need to know the qualifications of every judge in the hirachy?

Reply 44

I would. Just so you are extra prepared.

Original post by Owainew

Do we need to know the qualifications of every judge in the hirachy?

Reply 45

Original post by Bucky Barnes

When an EU law is directly applicable it means that national parliaments do not need to enact any legislation to make it law in member states e.g. EU treaties and EU regulations - they don’t need any Acts of Parliament to make them into law in their member states.

I think that European Community Law is the same as European Union Law, which is a group of treaties and legislation which has either a direct or indirect effect on the laws of EU member states. So far as English law is concerned, all treaties signed by our head of government become part of our English law automatically as a result of the European Communities Act 1972. This means citizens of the EU are able to rely on principles of the treaties even if they have not been enacted into English law - this then links in with direct applicability. You can illustrate this with the case of Van Duyn v Home Office ECJ 1974.

I hope that helps!

Thanks so very much for that. It was very useful.

Reply 46

OP

Im bit confused, who appoints law lords? The lord Chancellor or the JAC? And does the Lord chancellor appoint members for the JAC?

Reply 47

Law lords as in Supreme Court justices? They're appointment is set out under sections 23-31 of the CRA 2005. The lord chancellor convenes a selection commission which reports its selection back to the Lord chancellor, he can accept reject or ask them to reconsider their decision.

Reply 48

Also research how representative the judiciary is of society, that's a nice question and it has come up before so!

Reply 49

Original post by phiB

Also research how representative the judiciary is of society, that's a nice question and it has come up before so!

I will be crying tears of joy if that question came up.

Reply 50

OP

What was not bad at all! I did 1 and 2

Reply 51

I did 1 and 4! So happy

Reply 52

Original post by phiB

I did 1 and 4! So happy

I did 1 and 4. Please tell me that judicial law making is advantages and disadvantages of precedent.

Reply 53

OP

That was the reason why i didnt do it, i wasn't sute with 2b so i talked about appointments

Reply 54

Original post by Owainew

That was the reason why i didnt do it, i wasn't sute with 2b so i talked about appointments

I wasn't sure with 2a, that's why I did 4. God I hope I am right. It's got to be precedent because it was in the precedent section. I just wrote a lot of **** for that. Hopefully, LA3 and LA4 will bump it up. If not I can resit...again. Can you resit more than once?

Reply 55

OP

Original post by inspirationhitme

I wasn't sure with 2a, that's why I did 4. God I hope I am right. It's got to be precedent because it was in the precedent section. I just wrote a lot of **** for that. Hopefully, LA3 and LA4 will bump it up. If not I can resit...again. Can you resit more than once?

Don't know im afriad, you will be in uni on your 3rd try!

Reply 56

Original post by inspirationhitme

I did 1 and 4. Please tell me that judicial law making is advantages and disadvantages of precedent.

I don't think so sorry, I don't think there's a huge difference but it was quite an oddly specific question. I'm sure you'll be fine though I can imagine that lots of people wrote about that

Reply 57

Izzyf70

Can someone please tell me what part A of question 3 was? I know a lot of people wrote about the human rights act but I thought as it said EU law that it was about the E U topic so I avoided this question.Did anyone answer it??? thanks.

Reply 58