 UK Perspective | Correspondents' Reports | Government and Legislation | Courts and Judgments | Legal Press | Law Schools | Study Law in the UK | Other || World Law Home —————————————————————————————
Alisdair A. Gillespie, Barrister Hello and welcome to this week's UK Perspective. The controversy over the News of the World's decision to "name and shame" paedophiles continues here (see a previous Perspective). Although the News of the World has now stopped this practice they have started a new campaign to try and pass a "Sarah's Law" modelled on Megan's Law in the USA. While debate on this latest initiative has proceeded, protests against paedophiles have increased dramatically. Until a couple of days ago, there were nightly protests in Portsmouth against paedophiles living in that area (click for story). These led to near-riots (click for story) and eventually to the eviction of a paedophile (click for story). Other protests led to one convicted sex offender committing suicide (click for story). There is a danger that these protests are actually undermining the existing system of monitoring paedophiles, which appears to work. The government is committed to taking a tougher stance on sex offenders (click for story) but this week two judges handed down suspended sentences for child abusers because of the naming and shaming and subsequent hounding they had received (click for story). I do not agree with the naming and shaming campaign, and do not believe that Sarah's Law as suggested is either desirable or necessary, but I think there is significant problems with the approach taken by these judges. The Attorney-General has the power to appeal unduly lenient sentences and it is to be hoped that consideration is given to using this power here. There have been other developments in UK law this week. Twenty people are to sue McDonalds for serving coffee too hot (click for story) This follows a challenge in the USA a few years ago where a grandmother obtained a significant amount of money with a similar claim. In the UK compensation is usually awarded in a sensible manner, and large sums of money are rarely awarded, so the McDonalds corporation has less to worry about. Depending on your point of view this challenge is either interesting or stupid. One expects coffee to be hot, but many people would argue that if McDonalds are serving coffee without a spill-proof lid etc. then this may contravene the law of negligence. In England - like in many countries - this is based on the "neighbour" principle: that being you should not harm your neighbour. Without prejudicing this trial there may be an argument here that more care has to be taken. Others, however, fear that if this case succeeds the UK could end up in the same way as the USA, and a litigation culture will develop. Finally this week, Home Office press releases have signalled the impending implementation of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999. This Act, or rather part of the Act, changes the way in which children and other vulnerable witnesses are treated in the courts. The Home Office has announced that the Act will come into force in September - one of its major provisions is that those charged with rape will not be able to personally cross-examine their victims (click here for story). This was prompted because one man, Ralston Edwards (tried for rape in 1997) kept his victim on the witness stand for 6 days and went through the rape and her private life in incredible detail. The victim described the experience as having been "raped again" and a change in the law was promised. The new Act has been universally welcomed here. It does not stop a cross-examination from occurring, but ensures that only a lawyer can do this. If the defendant does not have a lawyer the court will appoint him one for this task. A similar provision has existed in relation to child victims for a long time and works well. That's it for this week's UK Perspective. I am away on holiday again next week so the next Perspective will appear in two weeks time. Missed last week's UK Perspective? Read it here! ——————————————————————— JURIST's own correspondent in the United Kingdom reports on recent developments in UK law: ——————————————————————— Government and Legislation The United Kingdom does not have a written constitution. The equivalent body of law is based on statute, common law, and "traditional rights." Changes may come about formally through new acts of parliament, informally through the acceptance of new practices and usage, or by judicial precedents. Although parliament has the theoretical power to make or repeal any law, in actual practice the weight of 700 years of tradition restrains arbitrary actions. Executive government rests nominally with the monarch but actually is exercised by a committee of ministers (cabinet) traditionally selected from among the members of the House of Commons and, to a lesser extent, the House of Lords. The prime minister is the leader of the majority party in the Commons, and the government is dependent on its support. Parliament represents the entire country and can legislate for the whole or for any constituent part or combination of parts. The maximum parliamentary term is 5 years, but the prime minister may ask the monarch to dissolve parliament and call a general election at any time. The focus of legislative power is the 650-member House of Commons, which has sole jurisdiction over finance. The House of Lords, although shorn of most of its powers, can still review, amend, or delay temporarily any bills except those relating to the budget. Only a few of the 1,200 members of the House of Lords attend its sessions regularly. The House of Lords has more time than the House of Commons to pursue one of its more important functions--debating public issues. The judiciary is independent of the legislative and executive branches but cannot review the constitutionality of legislation. Source: U.S. Department of State
Courts and Judgments
Legal Press ——————————————————————— Law Schools
Most UK universities offer law courses. In the United Kingdom, law is a three-year undergraduate degree - entry is decided by reference to "A-Level" points. "A-Levels" are examinations students take in the two years prior to entering university and each grade is worth a different level of points. The hierarchy of the UK law schools is roughly equal to those who wish or demand students who score the highest. The older universities (Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, London etc.) are still considered to be some of the most prestigious universities in which to "read law", but many newcomers have entered the field and, infused with energetic faculty members and diverse student bodies, are beginning to give the traditional institutions a run for their money. There is no set format for UK law teaching; each university is allowed to decide how the subject will be taught. Some universities offer a large number of lectures and a small number of tutorials (e.g. "Oxbridge" and Durham), whereas other universities prefer more tutorials where near one-to-one tuition can be offered (e.g. Northumbria University) The only common thread uniting law degrees is that for them to qualify as law degrees for professional purposes, students must study Constitutional law, E.U. law, Contract Law, Law of Torts, Criminal Law, Land Law and Equity and Trusts. At the end of three years students are awarded a bachelor's degree in law and they must then decide what to do next. A large proportion - possibly around one-third - will decide not to enter a career as a lawyer. The others must choose between becoming a barrister (essentially, a courtroom litigator) or a solicitor. Students who do not have a qualifying law degree (either because they have not studied one of the subjects listed above, or because they have read for another degree) but who nonetheless wish to enter the professions must do a one-year course called the Common Professional Examination and then they too have to choose which profession to enter. A would-be barrister has to take the Bar Vocational Course, which lasts one year. Prior to 1998 this course was taken in London at the Inns of Court School of Law, but nowadays there are several universities which also offer the training. Would-be solicitors study the Legal Practice Course, which is also one-year long and is offered by numerous universities, as well as by the College of Law (the formal "solicitor's university"). After completing their respective professional courses, law students then undergo professional training. A barrister undertakes a year of "pupillage" in barristers' "chambers", which is actually two six-month placements. A solicitor takes a training contract ("articles") which lasts for two years. Legal education in England and Wales is changing quite rapidly, and in the opinion of some academic and professional observers a number of the older UK universities are not changing fast enough. Many UK law schools now offer skills-based learning like moots and advocacy, and many universities are also offering part-time or distance-learning degrees. The Open University (which was set up by the government in the 1960s primarily to teach adults by distance learning, which then meant correspondence and television) is leading the way in this field in general; in law, the University of London now offers an external LL.B. degree that can be taken by distance learning, and Strathclyde University in Scotland is offering an LL.M. through the internet. Bringing modern teaching methods to bear on legal education will help to ensure that law remains one of the more popular and respected degrees in the United Kingdom.
Alisdair A. Gillespie
Study Law in the UK Summer Study Abroad
Other |
WORLD
LAW/United Kingdom
|