Back
to top
Sources of law?
Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Sorry if this is in the wrong section mods, wasn't sure where to put it.
I've started work experience today and for tomorrow my boss wants me to know four or five 'sources of law'. Maybe I'm being thick, but I'm not even sure what this means! What is a source of law, and what are the four or five that he means?!
I've started work experience today and for tomorrow my boss wants me to know four or five 'sources of law'. Maybe I'm being thick, but I'm not even sure what this means! What is a source of law, and what are the four or five that he means?!
0
reply
Report
#3
4 or 5 sources? Basically where law comes from I imagine
So the main ones would be
Statute (obviously)
Common Law (this is previous decisions in cases)
EU Law (Conventions etc)
Human Rights Law
International Law (Basically treaties we as a country have signed up to etc)
Obviously some of these areas overlap
So the main ones would be
Statute (obviously)
Common Law (this is previous decisions in cases)
EU Law (Conventions etc)
Human Rights Law
International Law (Basically treaties we as a country have signed up to etc)
Obviously some of these areas overlap
0
reply
Report
#4
I am no expert myself, but I would go with common/case law, legislation, European Community (EU) Law, European Convention on Human Rights and equity.
0
reply
Report
#5
In Scotland anyway: precedent, statute, convention, institutional writers, custom, principles of equity
0
reply
Report
#6
Question: do they have institutional writers in England and Wales?
Ah, but that's only because it's incorporated by statute.
(Original post by eve_22)
European Convention on Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
0
reply
Report
#7
(Original post by L i b)
Ah, but that's only because it's incorporated by statute.
Ah, but that's only because it's incorporated by statute.
"The European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a treaty signed in 1950 by the then members of the Council of Europe. In this way, it predates the Euopean Communities and Union and arises from a quite different organisation. The two are linked, however, in that adherence to the Convention is now effectively a condition of membership of the EU. Additionally, the European Court of Justice refers to the Convention which influences its decisions, even though the EU is not a member of the Convention. Note that the European Court of Human Rights (described below) is not the same as the European Court of Justice. The judges are different and one sits in Starsbourg, the other on Luxembourg.
The UK was a founding member of the Convention and was very influential in its design. It was amongst the first states to ratify the treaty. It has allowed individuals to make complaints to the European Commission on Human Rights since 1966.
Source here
0
reply
Report
#8
(Original post by eve_22)
You mean by way of Human Rights Act 1998?
"The European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a treaty signed in 1950 by the then members of the Council of Europe. In this way, it predates the Euopean Communities and Union and arises from a quite different organisation. The two are linked, however, in that adherence to the Convention is now effectively a condition of membership of the EU. Additionally, the European Court of Justice refers to the Convention which influences its decisions, even though the EU is not a member of the Convention. Note that the European Court of Human Rights (described below) is not the same as the European Court of Justice. The judges are different and one sits in Starsbourg, the other on Luxembourg.
The UK was a founding member of the Convention and was very influential in its design. It was amongst the first states to ratify the treaty. It has allowed individuals to make complaints to the European Commission on Human Rights since 1966.
Source here
You mean by way of Human Rights Act 1998?
"The European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a treaty signed in 1950 by the then members of the Council of Europe. In this way, it predates the Euopean Communities and Union and arises from a quite different organisation. The two are linked, however, in that adherence to the Convention is now effectively a condition of membership of the EU. Additionally, the European Court of Justice refers to the Convention which influences its decisions, even though the EU is not a member of the Convention. Note that the European Court of Human Rights (described below) is not the same as the European Court of Justice. The judges are different and one sits in Starsbourg, the other on Luxembourg.
The UK was a founding member of the Convention and was very influential in its design. It was amongst the first states to ratify the treaty. It has allowed individuals to make complaints to the European Commission on Human Rights since 1966.
Source here
The ECtHR didn't change the law or have any influence over it, all it could do is award damages, which the states were then at liberty to pay or not.
0
reply
Report
#9
the ECHR isn't a source of law in and of itself eve, it is an example of a source of law - ie a treaty ie international law. lib is right.
0
reply
Report
#10
The prerogative, on a strict reading, is not a source of law...
It was found in the Proclamations case that the prerogative does not have the power to change the common law.
(Original post by proclamations case;undefined)
the King hath no prerogative but that which the law of the land allows him
the King hath no prerogative but that which the law of the land allows him
Last edited by RK; 9 months ago
0
reply
Report
#11
(Original post by Ethereal)
the ECHR isn't a source of law in and of itself eve, it is an example of a source of law - ie a treaty ie international law. lib is right.
the ECHR isn't a source of law in and of itself eve, it is an example of a source of law - ie a treaty ie international law. lib is right.
Thank you.
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
