1.Young v Bristol case
2. Judicature acts
3. Adversarial system (Hearsay, Evidence + Witnesses)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Statutory Interpretation (4 Interpretation rules, 3 Language rules)
5. Literal rule (+R v Harris: ‘stab, cut, wound’)
6. Golden rule (+R v Allen, Bigamy case)
7. Mischief rule (+R v Hughes, prostitution case)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. the Elements of a crime (+ exceptions: no mens rea)
9. types of Offences (+ Crown court)
10. difference: s18 en s20 (Common assault)
11a. difference: s20en47,
11b. difference:s39en47
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 3 parties of a Trust
13. Equity en de Defences
14. difference: Equitable en common law Remedies
15. Specific performance
16. difference: Promissory and proprietary Estoppel
17. Injunctions: freezing orders + search order
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. doctrine of Precedent (+Stare decisis, +Donoghue v Stevenson)
19. system of Woolf (+Track system)
20. Privity contract
,1. Young versus BRISTOL (Aeroplane Company) [1944] .
This case was about an employment dispute where the claimant (Young) asked for
damages from his employer (Bristol Aeroplane Company Limited). Young asked for
damages because he made personal injuries when he worked.
The big question in this case, was if the Court of Appeal was bound to follow its own
prior decisions or if it have the jurisdiction to follow his new own decisions.
There is a difference between the vertical and horizontal effect that the courts need
to follow:
The vertical effect means that higher courts bind lower courts.
The horizontal effect means that courts are generally bound by their own past
decisions, or decisions of courts on the same level.
There is one exception (horizontal): the Supreme Court must not follow his
own previous decisions when "it appears right to do so,"
Because of the case of young, was found that the Court of appeal also have a
similar exception.
This case said that the court of appeal is bound to his own decisions (and courts of
coordinate jurisdiction), EXCEPT in the following situations:
1) When there were 2 similar cases in the past, then can the court choose which
of the two previous conflicting decisions of its own he will follow.
2) The court is not bound to follow a decision of its own if the decision was given
per incuriam. Per incuriam mean "through lack of care", for example that a
statute was not brought to the attention of the earlier court.
3) An earlier decision of its own which cannot stand with a decision of the
Supreme Court, must the court not follow.
, 2. Judicature acts (1873-1875).
This act came because in the years before the Judicature Act, there was a lot of
duplication of claims in the courts of common law and equity.
The judicature acts UNIFIED the courts of common law and equity into one unified
system. Because of this reform, the: old courts of common law and the Court of
Chancery and the Court of Appeal were merged into the Supreme Court of
Judicature (the High Court of Justice + the Court of Appeal).
After the introduction of the Judicature Acts, the courts became empowered to apply
both common law and equity in their decisions. When there is a conflict, then has
equity priority.
The Judicature Act created also a uniform writ, to gain access to court, this
eliminated duplication of claims. Judges took consideration with both (common law
and equity) when they make decisions.
The difference between common law and equity is still a fundamental aspect of the
English legal system, because these systems reflect two complementary but
different styles of jurisdiction.
Common law is based on fixed rules and precedent, while equity focuses on
fairness and more discret solutions (in situations where the strict application
of common law falls short).
2. Judicature acts
3. Adversarial system (Hearsay, Evidence + Witnesses)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Statutory Interpretation (4 Interpretation rules, 3 Language rules)
5. Literal rule (+R v Harris: ‘stab, cut, wound’)
6. Golden rule (+R v Allen, Bigamy case)
7. Mischief rule (+R v Hughes, prostitution case)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. the Elements of a crime (+ exceptions: no mens rea)
9. types of Offences (+ Crown court)
10. difference: s18 en s20 (Common assault)
11a. difference: s20en47,
11b. difference:s39en47
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 3 parties of a Trust
13. Equity en de Defences
14. difference: Equitable en common law Remedies
15. Specific performance
16. difference: Promissory and proprietary Estoppel
17. Injunctions: freezing orders + search order
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. doctrine of Precedent (+Stare decisis, +Donoghue v Stevenson)
19. system of Woolf (+Track system)
20. Privity contract
,1. Young versus BRISTOL (Aeroplane Company) [1944] .
This case was about an employment dispute where the claimant (Young) asked for
damages from his employer (Bristol Aeroplane Company Limited). Young asked for
damages because he made personal injuries when he worked.
The big question in this case, was if the Court of Appeal was bound to follow its own
prior decisions or if it have the jurisdiction to follow his new own decisions.
There is a difference between the vertical and horizontal effect that the courts need
to follow:
The vertical effect means that higher courts bind lower courts.
The horizontal effect means that courts are generally bound by their own past
decisions, or decisions of courts on the same level.
There is one exception (horizontal): the Supreme Court must not follow his
own previous decisions when "it appears right to do so,"
Because of the case of young, was found that the Court of appeal also have a
similar exception.
This case said that the court of appeal is bound to his own decisions (and courts of
coordinate jurisdiction), EXCEPT in the following situations:
1) When there were 2 similar cases in the past, then can the court choose which
of the two previous conflicting decisions of its own he will follow.
2) The court is not bound to follow a decision of its own if the decision was given
per incuriam. Per incuriam mean "through lack of care", for example that a
statute was not brought to the attention of the earlier court.
3) An earlier decision of its own which cannot stand with a decision of the
Supreme Court, must the court not follow.
, 2. Judicature acts (1873-1875).
This act came because in the years before the Judicature Act, there was a lot of
duplication of claims in the courts of common law and equity.
The judicature acts UNIFIED the courts of common law and equity into one unified
system. Because of this reform, the: old courts of common law and the Court of
Chancery and the Court of Appeal were merged into the Supreme Court of
Judicature (the High Court of Justice + the Court of Appeal).
After the introduction of the Judicature Acts, the courts became empowered to apply
both common law and equity in their decisions. When there is a conflict, then has
equity priority.
The Judicature Act created also a uniform writ, to gain access to court, this
eliminated duplication of claims. Judges took consideration with both (common law
and equity) when they make decisions.
The difference between common law and equity is still a fundamental aspect of the
English legal system, because these systems reflect two complementary but
different styles of jurisdiction.
Common law is based on fixed rules and precedent, while equity focuses on
fairness and more discret solutions (in situations where the strict application
of common law falls short).
