Rules Of Recognitions: A Case Study

104 of the Criminal Code.  The  High  Court  ruled that  the  main principle of  the

It is portion of the ladder of principles that federal courts custom to evaluate the administration's concern against a legal right or code. The minor principles are rational center review and demanding or intermediate examination. These values are castoff to check statutes and administration act at entire levels of management within the America.

These rules have been developed in order to try and keep the process fair to both sides and ensure consistency between trials. The implementation of legal aid ensures that poorer offenders have access to the legal system and receive a fair trial. The measures both legal and non-legal through the criminal trial process ensure that each offender receives a fair trial in which they can be correctly convicted and effectively sentenced.

Analyse the importance of early identification of speech, language and communication delays and disorders and the potential risks of late recognition.

Statutory interpretation is process of interpreting statutes by the judges. The definition of statutes have had very specific words but indeed the judges would still need the statutory interpretation to help them. The reason of this, even how, the words in the statutes are specific but sometimes the words contains ambiguity and vagueness in words. On top of that, each word could give us different meaning. For example, we can find in the Oxford Dictionary where a word would contain at least one meaning. Hence, without the statutory interpretation, a lot of judges would have trouble in deciding their judgments in deciding a case. This essay will analyse the four rules, intrinsic aids and extrinsic aids and presumptions in the interpretation

Hart’s idea is this: All one/society needs is a legal system based on the four rules.

The wording has also lead to a gap in the law, with, in certain cases defendants getting off a crime, which in terms of common sense he is guilty of. For instance if man in the street threatens to kill you it would be seen as assault. But if he shouts that he is going to kill you tomorrow in the eyes of the law that is not an assault, even though any reasonable person can see that it is a clear danger to the person the threat is directed to. Another area of criticism is the hierarchy of the offences; the offences are listed in terms of seriousness with the most serious offences being first in the Act.

The most influential definition of the rule of law is that of the A.V. Dicey. In his work he defines the rule of law to be composed of three central elements. The first element states that “no man is punishable or can be made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts”. This element is designed to deny to governments any rights to make secret or arbitrary laws, or retrospective penal laws, and to limit the discretionary powers of government” . In order to comply with the requirement, it is stated that the rule must be open, clear, accessible and certain. This is supported by Lord Bingham as he argued that the law must be accessible, clear and predictable as wide discretionary powers would lead to arbitrariness which is against the rule of law. This principle is further illustrated by

Perception checking is a cooperative approach to communication that provides accuracy instead of assuming our first interpretation is correct. It minimizes defensiveness through face saving and requires both nonverbal and verbal elements to match. The benefits of perception checking is to help us have a better understanding of a message, so both persons can mutually relate and to reduce conflict so we don 't jump to conclusions. In the perception process reality is constructed in two ways. The first order realities is physically observable qualities of a thing or situation. For example, if your friend calls you a “bone head”. On the other hand, second order realities cannot reside in objects or events but rather in our minds. It involves our attaching meaning to first order things or situations. For instance, your friend is being critical is an example of second order realities. Perception checking has three parts: description, interpretation, and clarification. Description is describing a behavior that was noticed. Interpretation is providing interpretations of the behavior, Lastly, ask for clarification from the person about the behavior and interpretations. These three parts are important because they help an individual how to prevent assuming something that is probably not the intention of the other person which is why clarification is needed in a situation like this. It is better to gather more information about the situation then to think the

In each of these set of laws, they have rules and punishments for causing physical harm.

To consider each principles power and their own basis within the British constitution, the rule of law needs to be defined too, but this is somewhat harder to do as it has no set definition. Different theories have attempted to define it though, and most agree with the Diceyan definition.It states that the rule of law contains three core elements - one, the law is absolutely supreme, two, everyone is equal before the law, and three, the Constitution may be found in the ordinary laws of the state.

In 1999 the Civil Procedure Rules came into place these rules were accompanied by Practice Directions , which replaced the Rules of the Supreme Court and also the County Court Rule . These amendments allowed the rules to be simpler also providing an extensive outline for a general application. Lord Woolf suggested that there should be a transformation of the literature, which would be able to support the approach and the legal interpretation of words. The new rules were created to have an accessible and equal attitude due the overriding objective.

This type of sentencing guideline utilized in substantive rationality can also be referred to as discretionary regulation, more formally defined as “the subjugation of the internal logic of

Sanctions are only appealed to in the event that there is a breach. It therefore follows that the opinion of Hart is that various form of law cannot be explained in a single expression as orders backed with threats of sanction. Thus, in contradiction with Austin’s viewpoint, Hart formulated a dual system which contains two types of rules, primary rules (duty-imposing) and secondary rules (power-conferring). Primary rules are generally duty-imposing, which embodies non-optional rules of obligation. It often concerned with standard of behavior as requirement to do or to abstain from performing an act. On the other hand, secondary rules are ancillary to primary rules the former conferring right to introduce, to vary the primary rules and to determine the mode in which their violation could be determined (judicial process). Such secondary rules are rather regulatory or facilitative than coercive in nature. In short, Austin’s catch all theory of seeing law as command back with sanction leave no room for right, privileges given to subject of Sovereignty which does not constitute non optional

Here the mischief rule is used. This rule makes use of external aids which include “ the common law, whatever new remedies the