Exploration of English Law

The criminal justice system changed over time from the centuries during the Anglo-Saxon time period to the centuries of the Middle Ages. Justice transformed from a savage way of punishment to more organized and civilized. The Canterbury Tales and Beowulf reflect the change, and even the continuity, of punishments due to legal justice of the Anglo-Saxon and the Middle Ages.

With reference to the above cases it can be shown that the law was increasingly interfering with the private life of indivduals and moving further and further away from the idea of needing a public element. The height of this can be shown though Watt v Annan, in which many judges have said that it: “went too far in extending the crime to private behaviour on the basis of its liability to deprave or corrupt”. In Watt v Annan the law interfered with the private life of individuals as the case

The span of Western Civilization encompasses many notable achievements in legal development. As empires rise and expand, it becomes necessary to create a legal code that standardizes punishment, institutes a form of common law, and protects society from arbitrary abuses of power. These principles were formally established relatively early in the western world, and became the foundations upon which later government institutions created their legal systems. The Code of Hammurabi, the Twelve Tables, and Magna Carta, all represent key moments in the evolution of legal thought and practice. Not only do they show the legal and political direction of the empires, but also the progression of their social values

PHL 612 Philosophy of Law [Calendar Description]: What is law? What makes something a legal norm? Should

Merit –compare and contrast the role of judges ,lawyers and lay people within the English courts.

I did go two different courts. Southwark Crown Court which was opened in 1983 is one of those. It contains 15 courts, making it the fourth biggest court in the nation and is outlined as a genuine extortion focus. In England and Wales the crown courts additionally go about as a court of first occasion for serious criminal offences. A case, contingent upon the seriousness can take many deferent routs through the structure of the legal framework. The severe the crime, the higher the court that the trial does settled. My court visit on eighteenth and nineteenth of December 2014 was truly fundamental, keeping in mind the end goal to accomplish a more prominent useful understanding of the different angles and structural type of legitimate framework. A percentage of the procedures that they take after are indeed regulations of Act of Parliament, the lion 's share of which are a piece of the Court Procedures Act 2004.

As Inspector Davidson was preparing his plan of action based on the information he had received from the informer, in the NSW parliament however a debate had concluded as to the course of action the NSW Government would take in the bringing about the cessation of bushranging conducted by Ben Hall and Co as well as Daniel 'Mad Dog' Morgan who had at the time crossed over to Victoria and was soon dead; that course of action by the NSW Government was the introduction of an ancient English Law 'The Felons Apprehension Act', which after a proclamation being issued for Ben Hall, Gilbert, Dunn and Morgan (separate from Hall &c) to surrender themselves to Goulburn Gaol by the 29th April 1865, and where after that date and by the 10th of May 1865 the bushrangers would be declared

Once the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776 there was an urgent need for government and law. The question was of what law and of what government. The English common law was in practice, for the most part, in all the colonies and was the root of many feelings of tyranny. The colonial experience drew large cause for new common law as it differed so much from European experience. For example, as time went on, more and more Americans began owning land at a far larger rate than their European counter parts. This created a need for me common law address ownership. Another was the idea democracy which in no way was an idea held dear to England. This also created many differences in the colonial experience that could not be represented

Law touches almost every aspect of our lives. It demonstrates what we as a society define as right and wrong and offers the best protection to individuals against major powers. I want to study law to gain an understanding of the laws which govern us, as well as to help people overcome inequality. Recently three MP’s were trying to use Article Nine of the Bill of Rights 1689 to privilege their expenses, consequently protecting them from prosecution. This abuse of power served to increase my interest in the overlay and contradictory nature of our laws.

Laws in today’s society have undoubtedly been influenced by those between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries in Europe. Striking similarities can be found between both legal systems. For this reason, it is important to analyze these influences to better understand our own laws and practices. I will be focusing on what the laws were, why they were created, how they were enforced, how they affected society, and how religion significantly influenced them. The

The jury system was introduced in Queensland in 1867 as part of the Queensland Constitution Act. Juries are used in indictable offences in criminal trials. They are mainly used in the District and Supreme Court if the accused pleads guilty. Juries are used to decide the guilt or innocence, of the accused person, based on the facts and evidence provided in court by the Prosecution and Defence Council.

In the beginning, this country was a melting pot. Many different people, from many different countries, of many different ethnic groups, speaking in many different tongues came to America. English arose as the predominant language of the United States. Over time, people realized the importance of staying in touch with their cultural backgrounds, including the language of their native countries. The main problem presented now lies in communication and interaction with each other. It is obvious that miscommunication causes problems. An "English Only" law will unite Americans and give them all a common ground on which to communicate. It will diminish racial conflicts, as well as encourage immigrants to become involved in the U.S.

Throughout the United States there are many different laws among the fifty states that make up this union. The laws are different throughout the states because of the need of the laws. Living in one state and not having the advantages or disadvantages of a law in another state would not be that unfair or unequal. This is true because if you don’t like a law in your state you could always fight it and try to change it or you could always move out of that state and go to one that has the laws that you like.

Q1.A review of the case reveals that Indri is the sole director and shareholder in his own company. The Australian law makes a clear distinction between a business and its owner. A business is therefore considered a separate entity from its owner. A company is regarded as a separate legal entity to its shareholders, directors as well as employees, all of whom have a limited liability. This principle was at one point affirmed by the House of Lords in the Salomon v Salomon case. In this case, a company is considered a new legal entity that is separate from all of its shareholders. The court did this is a one person company as is the case of Indri. Ramsay and Noakes (2001) noted that Windeyer J stated in a High Court case of Peate v Federal Commissioner of Taxation noted that a company represents new legal entity, a person in the very eyes of the law. This separate entity principle has persisted in the Anglo-Australian Corporate law for several years. Therefore whenever a company acts it does so in its own rights. Therefore the shareholders are never liable to the company's debt that lies beyond their initial investment as capital (Ciro et al,2009).

In the English Law system, the effect of legislation remains statute in force until they are repealed. (R v Ducan, 1994). The application of legislation is ambiguous.