Lord Woolf 's The Civil Procedure Rules

Civil Law: about a party bringing an action for a personal remedy of some kind.

For example, the UNCRC 1989, Children Act 1989 amended in 2004, Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has made some controversial decisions in key cases in Canada’s past. When looking at the Canadian Founders intent for Canadian Federalism, many scholars argue that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has done a bad job following the founders’ intentions and intentionally decentralized Canada. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council did fail in keeping in line with what the founders intended for Canada and may have even intentionally set out to decentralize the Canadian government, but this does not mean it had a negative impact on Canada. There are a number of cases that were seen by the JCPC that played a vital role in the decentralization of the Canadian government, yet

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.

Through the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998(the act), the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) starts running on 1st July 1998, where located at 55 King Street, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (‘who we are’. 2015). It is designed for people to resolve quickly a dispute hearing, and it also provide a low-cost, accessible and independent service, which called one stop for multiple disputes (2015).

Appellate rules are organized topically into seven titles, first by the source from which the appeal originates; district court appeals are followed by Tax Court appeals, then administrative agency appeals. These are followed by rules for extraordinary writs and for habeas corpus proceedings and proceedings in forma pauperis. Then the Rules provide general provisions relating to computation of time, format of briefs, costs, and the ability of

Identification of Parties and Procedural Details: Who is the Plaintiff/Appellant? Who is the Defendant/Appealer? What is the cause of action? Who prevailed in lower court? Who is appealing to what court?

Explain why it was necessary to change the law in relation to your issue (3 marks)

To begin, common law originated in Medieval England in the time of King Henry II. The practice developed sending circuit judges from the King’s central court to travel throughout England to hear the various disputes. The aim of these courts (assizes) was to add consistency and fairness to the legal system. Alongside the traveling courts King Henry also established the jury system. Over time these judges recorded the information of each case they heard as well as the decisions and punishments that were ordered. This is known as case law or common law. This began a justice system that relied on the principle of stare decisis or “to stand by the decision”. This principle developed into the rule of precedent which was used to apply the previous decision to a case with similar circumstance. This system was used throughout the country and thus was known as common law. As the English began colonizing Canada they brought their legal systems with them, which greatly influenced today’s legal system.

In the statement, it is mentioned that the great strength of the common law lies in its capacity to develop to meet the changing needs and circumstances of the society in which it functions. A case to illustrate this point would be W v Registrar of Marriages [2013] HKCFA 39 (CFA).

The rule of law is seen as being one of the most fundamental components of the UK constitution as well as being a principle that is concerned with restricting parliamentary action. Though the rule of law is seen to be a component in the constitution; the actual meaning of the rule of law has been very problematic to interpret. This is considerably down to the fact that it means different things to different people as since the nineteenth century, academics, politicians and judges have proposed diverse definitions and explanations in regards to the rule of law and the role it upholds in the UK constitution.

The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on the principle of stare decisis which means ‘to stand by what has been decided’. It is a common law principle whereby judges are bound to follow previous decisions in cases where the material facts are sufficiently similar and the earlier decision was made in a court above the current one in the court hierarchy. This doctrine of precedent is extremely strong in English law as it ensures fairness and consistency and it highlights the importance of case law in our legal system. Black's Law Dictionary defines "precedent" as a "rule of law established for the first time by a court for a particular type of case and thereafter referred to in deciding similar cases."

There are many differences as well as similarities between the civil and the common law judicial

in criminal law and Beckett Ltd v. Lyons [1967] 1 All ER 833 the law

The Rules of the Statutory interpretation are The literal rule (IRC v Hinchy, 1960), the golden rule(R v Allen, 1872), The mischief rule (Smith v Hughes, 1960) and The Ejusdem generis rule (Powell v Kempton Racecourse, 1899) The golden rule of statutory interpretation may be applied where an application of the literal rule would lead to an absurdity(R v Allen (1872) LR 1 CCR 367). This is law/ legislation, which has been enacted by Parliament and through administrative process. The law enacted by Parliament is known as an Act of Parliament.