PaigntonM
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
I have an essay question that I am struggling to know if I have made the right points about.

The question is: Critically evaluate the extent to which UK Parliament can legislate contrary to the Rule of Law?

Module Learning Outcomes of the Assignment is:

1. Describe the key features of UK public law and the meaning of 'the rule of law'
5. Describe the nature of the UK constitution and demonstrate knowledge of the main organs of state including Parliament and Government
6. Identify and discuss the sources of law including legislation, delegated legislation and judicial precedent
7.Demonstrate an understanding of the relevance of the European Convention of Human Rights and the citizen's liberties and human rights.
9. Analyse the way in which administrative acts omissions are supervised and controlled.

2000 words +- 10%

I have structured my answer like this:

First Paragraph is an introduction about the Rule of Law - Describing it has no official definition and is more of a unwritten doctrine, though is a core principle of the UK constitution.

2nd Paragraph - Describing the two types of Rule of Law, Formal and Substantive as well as their other names, and basic principles of each type of Rule of Law.

3rd Paragraph - Describes A.V Dicey and supporting the Formal rule of Law, talk about three heads of his idea of the Formal Rule of Law. Referencing the Bill of Rights Act 1688 which members of parliament are protected by during parliamentary session, how this goes against the Rule of Law.

4th Paragraph - Goes on saying about Lord Bingham's views of the substantive rule of law of how it should take into account human rights and have a moral flavour to it.

5th Paragraph - Describes what public law is. Describe constitutional law and how it lays the guidelines for governments.

6th Paragraph - Describes the Executive , Judiciary and Parliament and how the Lord Chancellor was part of all 3.

7th Paragraph - Bills Process describing all the main parts of creating law.

8th Paragraph - Delegated Legislation and what it is

9th Paragraph - Judicial Precedent

10th Paragraph - EEC and the European Communities Act 1972, and how it defies the rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty, but theoretically it doesnt as parliament can revoke the law.

Its more fleshed out than this, but if someone could go through the points and match it to the question and see if my train of thought is correct.

Also this is due in tomorrow 8 pm, i know its late but I didn't think of posting on here till today.
0
reply
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
(Original post by PaigntonM)
I have an essay question that I am struggling to know if I have made the right points about.

The question is: Critically evaluate the extent to which UK Parliament can legislate contrary to the Rule of Law?

Module Learning Outcomes of the Assignment is:

1. Describe the key features of UK public law and the meaning of 'the rule of law'
5. Describe the nature of the UK constitution and demonstrate knowledge of the main organs of state including Parliament and Government
6. Identify and discuss the sources of law including legislation, delegated legislation and judicial precedent
7.Demonstrate an understanding of the relevance of the European Convention of Human Rights and the citizen's liberties and human rights.
9. Analyse the way in which administrative acts omissions are supervised and controlled.

2000 words +- 10%

I have structured my answer like this:

First Paragraph is an introduction about the Rule of Law - Describing it has no official definition and is more of a unwritten doctrine, though is a core principle of the UK constitution.

2nd Paragraph - Describing the two types of Rule of Law, Formal and Substantive as well as their other names, and basic principles of each type of Rule of Law.

3rd Paragraph - Describes A.V Dicey and supporting the Formal rule of Law, talk about three heads of his idea of the Formal Rule of Law. Referencing the Bill of Rights Act 1688 which members of parliament are protected by during parliamentary session, how this goes against the Rule of Law.

4th Paragraph - Goes on saying about Lord Bingham's views of the substantive rule of law of how it should take into account human rights and have a moral flavour to it.

5th Paragraph - Describes what public law is. Describe constitutional law and how it lays the guidelines for governments.

6th Paragraph - Describes the Executive , Judiciary and Parliament and how the Lord Chancellor was part of all 3.

7th Paragraph - Bills Process describing all the main parts of creating law.

8th Paragraph - Delegated Legislation and what it is

9th Paragraph - Judicial Precedent

10th Paragraph - EEC and the European Communities Act 1972, and how it defies the rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty, but theoretically it doesnt as parliament can revoke the law.

Its more fleshed out than this, but if someone could go through the points and match it to the question and see if my train of thought is correct.
A point I'd make for that question is that parliamentary sovereignty and the seperation of powers allows the government of the time to legislate and have free reign to do what they want even if it is contrary to the rule of law because our constitution is uncodified, this is idea is called elective dictatorship.

I don't do Law A Level personally but I do government and politics which has a lot of crossover, hope that helps
0
reply
Forum User
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
My concern would be that you don't really get around to answering the question until paragraph 10. At the moment it looks as though your essay will be extremely descriptive and not evaluative.

The question is: Critically evaluate the extent to which UK Parliament can legislate contrary to the Rule of Law?
As I haven't done Public Law in over three years now I won't try and give a better structure but it may help if you think about what your conclusion is before you start writing. Suppose that Parliament wanted to pass a law that was obviously contrary to any reasonable definition of the rule of law: "All blue-eyed babies must be killed" (a classic example of Stephen's). Could it do so? The answer to that is your conclusion. The reason you gave that answer is the bulk of your essay. Explaining what the rule of law is and any other definitional matters can go towards the start, after an introduction that tells the reader what you are going to say, and should be done as briefly as possible.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you worried that a cap in student numbers would affect your place at uni?

Yes (108)
60%
No (37)
20.56%
Not sure (35)
19.44%

Watched Threads

View All