The court system in England and Wales originated during the Anglo - Saxon period. Back then local men gathered in Moot Courts, deciding on issues in line with local customs. Piece by piece the system became more sophisticated, which can be seen clearly after a brief overview on its evolution and evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages.
After the Norman Conquest, certain cases were brought before the King (Coram Rege in Latin), later the King started to delegate the power to administer Royal Justice to a council. This council was known as the King 's Court (Curia Regis in Latin), which later branched into the common-law courts. At first the Exchequer of pleas, Common Pleas and the King 's Bench, followed by the Court of Chancery in the mid-14th century. The Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875 modernised the court structure drastically. Introducing, the Supreme Court of Judicature also known as the House of Lords, as a final court of Appeal above the High Court. Along with the creation of a single Court of Appeal in Civil matters.
Furthermore, the introduction of a new improved divisional structure for the High Court. This was finalised in 1881 with the merge of Common pleas and Exchequer into the Queens Bench Division.
The Criminal Appeal Act 1907 recognised the right of appeal in criminal cases and established the Court of Criminal Appeal.
Continuing the modernisation, the Courts Act 1971 abolished and replaced various courts. At the same time the Act created the
The Victorian Court System was made up of many different parts, including the three different courts, the different juries, and the lawyers. There were three different courts: the Petty Court, the Assize Court and the King’s/Queen’s Bench. Each of the three courts functioned to serve a different purpose, and worked together to hold all of the trials. There were also different court sessions, which included Petty Sessions, Quarter Sessions, Borough Sessions, and City Councils, all of which served different purposes. In addition to the courts and court sessions, there were also the two different juries and the different lawyers. All of these components of the court were very important to the trials, and made the court what we know it as today.
The courts are the formal courts of law that have been established over many years. Their purpose is to uphold the law of the land as dictated by statute and impose this law over those who appear to be in contradiction of these laws. A traditional court proceeding involves to opposing parties who present the facts of the case to the court and the presiding judge or sheriff rules in favour of one of the parties. Their
Over the time the Supreme Court gained the power. The Judiciary is the system of courts, but it is also a “process”. As the historic circumstances were changing the Judiciary had to adapt too. In the last fifty years there were two judicial revolutions that increased the power of the Court. The first one was in the area of civil rights when the Court liberalized many public policies. In the second revolution the Judiciary
The Supreme Court was established in 1789, with its powers stated in Article III of the newly-ratified United States Constitution. In the years leading up to the Marshall era, the Court was little more than a shadow of its future self. It lacked both the prestige and authority of the latter 19th century. John Jay–and his successors, Rutledge and Ellsworth–oversaw few cases, and ever fewer significant ones. Often cited as an example of the early Court’s inefficiency, their most
Merit –compare and contrast the role of judges ,lawyers and lay people within the English courts.
This law created our judicial system. It established Supreme Court with 6 members and created the position of Attorney General.
Many years ago, before courts existed matters was handled in a privately or informally. This often led to violence and unjust treatment of innocent people. During the rise of the Greek City States and the Roman Empire law enforcement became a public affair instead of private. (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worral, 2011). Along with this movement became formalized courts and other criminal justice institutions. This allowed for law enforcement matters to be handled in a more civilized manner for resolving human conflict.
On observing the District Court a number of distinctions from the Local Courts were immediately made apparent. Without going in to detail about the actual structure of the courts, they seemed to fit more closely with the traditional schema of a typical courtroom. In particular the larger courtrooms with more facilities combined with the barristers and magistrates wearing their wig and robes seemed to instantly uphold the ideology of justice. It is interesting to note how appearances can automatically provide an impression that justice will be upheld. The
Is our NSW court system effective? It is if you have money. Is it something that we can just adhere to with out ever allowing it to adapt and evolve to meet societies needs? Absolutely not. Just like humanity, the NSW court system contains protruding faults that are made apparent with further scrutiny. The court system is something that requires our constant attention and support to improve and advance. In order for the court system to attain eligibility it relies heavily on 4 fundamental components; affordability, simplicity, fairness and accessibility. For countless Australians our legal system is lacking on all these fronts.
The United States court system is the institution were all the legal disputes in the american society are carryed out and resolved. However, one single court is not enough to resolve every single dispute in society and that is why the court system is made up of two different courts, the federal courts and the state courts. Moreover, the federal and state courts are made up of several divisions made to handle legal disputes differently depending on its seriousness. For example, the state court is made up of trial courts of limited jurisdiction and probate courts were cases and disputes originate and then move up to trial courts of general jurisdiction, intermediate apellate courts, and courts of last resort respectively depending on the case.In contrast, the federal court consists of district courts, territorial coutrs, tax court, court of international trade, claims court, court of veterans appeals, an courts of military review which then move on to courts of appeals respectively and may ultimately end up in the United States supreme court. In addition, cases from state court may also appeal into the federal court system but not the other way around.
This essay will discuss the role of the magistrate and jury in the English and Welsh legal decision-making process. It will assess both the advantages and disadvantages of both mechanisms and give an opinion on the contribution they make in the process.
Magistrates ' Courts tend to be less intimidating and easier to understand, influenced by the use of lay people,
In the 6th century, the trial or ordeal began, later in the 11th century the common law developed in England and the Normans evaded England. The common law system was brought over to Australia in the year 1788. The courts of Equity were developed due to the common law courts are ‘unjust’. These courts introduced fairness into our common law system.
Explain and critically consider the use of lay magistrates in the legal system of England and Wales.
The judges in the lower courts are bound to follow previous decision of the higher courts. It is an essential component of the common law as it is important of adequate law reporting. It is a decision of the court used as a source for future decision-making.