1.
England and Wales
–
The devolved National Assembly for Wales was created in 1999 by the Parliament of the United Kingdom under the Government of Wales Act 1998 and provides a degree of self-government in Wales. The powers of the Assembly were expanded by the Government of Wales Act 2006, which allows it to pass its own laws, there is no equivalent body for England, which is directly governed by the Parliament and the government of the United Kingdom. During the Roman occupation of Britain, the area of present-day England and Wales was administered as a single unit, at that time, most of the native inhabitants of Roman Britain spoke Brythonic languages, and were all regarded as Britons, divided into numerous tribes. After the conquest, the Romans administered this region as a single unit and this aimed to replace Welsh criminal law with English law. Welsh law continued to be used for civil cases until the annexation of Wales to England in the 16th century, the Laws in Wales Acts 1535–1542 then consolidated the administration of all the Welsh territories and incorporated them fully into the legal system of the Kingdom of England. Prior to 1746 it was not clear whether a reference to England in legislation included Wales and this specified that in all prior and future laws, references to England would by default include Wales. The Wales and Berwick Act was repealed in 1967, although the definition of England it created is preserved for acts passed prior to its repeal. Since the Acts repeal what was referred to as England is now England and Wales, while references to England, England and Wales are treated as a single unit, for most purposes, because the two form the constitutional successor to the former Kingdom of England. The continuance of Scots law was guaranteed under the 1706 Treaty of Union that led to the Acts of Union 1707, thus, most laws applicable to England also applied to Wales. However, Parliament now passes laws applicable to Wales and not to England, examples are the Welsh Language Acts 1967 and 1993 and the Government of Wales Act 1998. Measures and Acts of the National Assembly for Wales passed since the Government of Wales Act 2006 also apply in Wales, following the Government of Wales Act, effective since May 2007, the National Assembly for Wales can legislate on matters devolved to it. Following a referendum on 3 March 2011, the Welsh Assembly gained direct law-making powers and this was the first time in almost 500 years that Wales had its own powers to legislate. Each piece of Welsh legislation is known as an Act of the Assembly, outside of the legal system the position is mixed. Some organisations combine as England and Wales, others are separate, some religious denominations organise on the basis of England and Wales, most notably the Roman Catholic Church, but also small denominations, e. g. the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. Prior to the disestablishment of the Church in Wales in 1920, the Electoral Commission maintains a register of political parties, organised according to where the party operates. The order of precedence in England and Wales is distinct from those of Northern Ireland and Scotland, the national parks of England and Wales have a distinctive legislative framework and history. Courts of England and Wales Judiciary of England and Wales Cultural relationship between the Welsh and the English Geography of Wales Geography of England British Isles
2.
Strand, London
–
Strand is a major thoroughfare in the City of Westminster, Central London. The roads name comes from the Old English strond, meaning the edge of a river, the street was popular with the British upper classes between the 12th and 17th centuries, with many historically important mansions being built between the Strand and the river. These included Essex House, Arundel House, Somerset House, Savoy Palace, Durham House, the aristocracy moved to the West End over the 17th century, following which the Strand became well known for coffee shops, restaurants and taverns. The street was a point for theatre and music hall during the 19th century. At the east end of the street are two churches, St Mary le Strand and St Clement Danes. Several authors, poets and philosophers have lived on or near the Strand, including Charles Dickens, Ralph Waldo Emerson, the street has been commemorated in the song Lets All Go Down the Strand, now recognised as a typical piece of Cockney music hall. The street is the link between the two cities of Westminster and London. It runs eastward from Trafalgar Square, parallel to the River Thames, traffic travelling eastbound follows a short crescent around Aldwych, connected at both ends to the Strand. The road marks the boundary of the Covent Garden district. The name was first recorded in 1002 as strondway, then in 1185 as Stronde and it is formed from the Old English word strond, meaning the edge of a river. Initially it referred to the bank of the once much wider Thames. The name was applied to the road itself. In the 13th century it was known as Densemanestret or street of the Danes, Strand Bridge was the name given to Waterloo Bridge during its construction, it was renamed for its official opening on the second anniversary of the coalition victory in the Battle of Waterloo. London Bus routes 6,23,139 and 176 all run along the Strand, as do numerous night bus services. During Roman Britain, what is now the Strand was part of the route to Silchester, known as Iter VIII on the Antonine Itinerary, and it was briefly part of a trading town called Lundenwic that developed around 600 AD, and stretched from Trafalgar Square to Aldwych. Alfred the Great gradually moved the settlement into the old Roman town of Londinium from around 886 AD onwards, leaving no mark of the old town, and the area returned to fields. In the Middle Ages, the Strand became the route between the separate settlements of the City of London and the royal Palace of Westminster. The landmark Eleanors Cross was built in the 13th century at the end of the Strand at Charing Cross by Edward I commemorating his wife Eleanor of Castile
3.
City of Westminster
–
The City of Westminster is an Inner London borough which also holds city status. It occupies much of the area of Greater London including most of the West End. It is to the west of and adjoining the ancient City of London, directly to the east of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and it was created with the 1965 establishment of Greater London. Upon creation, Westminster was awarded city status, which had previously held by the smaller Metropolitan Borough of Westminster. Aside from a number of parks and open spaces, the population density of the district is high. Many sites commonly associated with London are in the borough, including St. Jamess Palace, Buckingham Palace, the Houses of Parliament, much of the borough is residential, and in 2008 it was estimated to have a population of 236,000. The local authority is Westminster City Council, the current Westminster coat of arms were given to the city by an official grant on September 2,1964. Westminster had other arms before, which had an identical to the chief in the present arms. The symbols in the two thirds of the shield stand for former municipalities now merged with the city, Paddington. The original arms had a portcullis as the charge, which now forms the crest. The origins of the City of Westminster pre-date the Norman Conquest of England, in the mid-11th Century king Edward the Confessor began the construction of an abbey at Westminster, only the foundations of which survive today. For centuries Westminster and the City of London were geographically quite distinct, Westminster briefly became a city in 1540 when Henry VIII created the short-lived Diocese of Westminster. Following the dissolution of Westminster Abbey, a court of burgesses was formed in 1585 to govern the Westminster area, Jamess, Strand, Westminster, Pimlico, Belgravia, and Hyde Park. The Westminster Metropolitan Borough was itself the result of an amalgamation which took place in 1900. Sir John Hunt O. B. E was the First Town Clerk of the City of Westminster, the boundaries of the City of Westminster today, as well as those of the other London boroughs, have remained more or less unchanged since the Act of 1963. On 22 March 2017, a terrorist attack took place on Westminster Bridge, Bridge Street and Old Palace Yard, five people - three pedestrians, one police officer, and the attacker - died as a result of the incident. More than 50 people were injured, an investigation is ongoing by the Metropolitan Police. The city is divided into 20 wards, each electing three councillors, Westminster City Council is currently composed of 44 Conservative Party members and 16 Labour Party members
4.
Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873
–
The Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873 was an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom in 1873. It would have retained those functions in relation to Scotland and Ireland for the time being. One of the reasons that the Liberal government under Gladstone wanted to abolish the judicial aspect of the House of Lords was that it was concerned for the quality of judges at this court. Therefore, some of the best lawyers in the land were prohibited from sitting as judges in the house simply because of their parentage. The reigning monarch could appoint any individual to be a peer and these judicial life peers would hold seats only for the duration of their life, their seat would not pass through their inheritance to their son. Thus, Queen Victoria and subsequent monarchs were able to appoint leading lawyers to adjudicate in the House of Lords by making them life peers. Lord Cairns, Disraelis Lord Chancellor, sought to remove the House of Lords jurisdiction for Scottish and Irish appeals as well, which would have completely removed its judicial jurisdiction. However, the Lord Chancellor could not muster the support in the Parliament for the bill as originally proposed in 1874 or when it was reintroduced in 1875
5.
Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1875
–
The Judicature Acts are a series of Acts of Parliament, beginning in the 1870s, which aimed to fuse the hitherto split system of courts in England and Wales. The first two Acts were the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873 and the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1875, the enactment was bold and revolutionary. By one section, the Queens Bench, the Common Pleas, and the Exchequer, nevertheless, all actions could now for the first time be initiated in a single High Court, and could be tried in any of its divisions. The procedure of the law courts had developed along highly technical. For example, to bring an action in the law courts a litigant had to file a writ chosen from a set of standard forms. The emphasis on adherence to established forms led to substantial injustice. However, by the nineteenth century proceedings before the Court of Chancery often dragged on and on, also, the practice of the court departed from the original principle of the Lord Chancellors conscience, with rules of equity restricting the manner in which the courts of equity would intervene. The solution adopted by the Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875 was to fuse the administration of the two, pleadings became more relaxed, with the emphasis shifting from the form of action to the cause of action. Writs for action were filled out for a litigant stating facts, the result was that, when the issues arising from the causes of action were decided in favour of one party, that party got relief. There were originally three common law divisions of the High Court corresponding with the three courts of common law. 25, all the jurisdiction of the Chief Baron and the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas was transferred. The High Court, therefore, came to consist of the Chancery division, the law division. To the Queens Bench division was attached, by an order of the Lord Chancellor dated 1 January 1884. The keystone of the created by the Judicature Acts was a strong court of appeal. The authors of the Judicature Act had before them two systems of pleading, both of which were open to criticism, there was some exaggeration in both statements. In a normal case, the plaintiff delivered his statement of claim, in which he was to set forth concisely the facts on which he relied, and the relief which he asked. The defendant then delivered his statement of defence, in which he was to say whether he admitted or denied the plaintiffs facts, the plaintiff might then reply, and the defendant rejoin, and so on until the pleaders had exhausted themselves. In the chancery division there are of course no pleadings in those matters which by the rules can be disposed of by summons in chambers instead of by ordinary suit as formerly
6.
Court of Criminal Appeal
–
The Court of Criminal Appeal is the name of an existing court of Scottish law and of historic courts in England and Wales, Ireland, and Northern Ireland. The Court of Criminal Appeal was an English appellate court for criminal cases established by the Criminal Appeal Act 1907 and it superseded the Court for Crown Cases Reserved to which referral had been solely discretionary and which could only consider points of law. Throughout the nineteenth century, there had been opposition from lawyers, judges, however, disquiet over the convictions of Adolf Beck and George Edalji led to the concession of a new court that could hear matters of law, fact or mixed law and fact. Though the court was staffed with the judges who had shown such hostility, during the period 1909–1912, there was an average of 450 annual applications for leave to appeal of which an average of 170 were granted. Of that 170, conviction was quashed in 20 percent of cases, rulings of the court included limitation of the lower courts ability simultaneously to try multiple defendants, multiple indictments and disparate counts within an indictment. The ability of the prosecution to introduce further evidence after the close of the case was curtailed as were several prejudicial practices with a defendants previous criminal record. The Court also did much to refine and systematise the law of evidence, on 1 October 1966, the Court of Criminal Appeal was superseded by the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. Following the Criminal Appeal Act 1926, when the Scottish High Court of Justiciary hears criminal appeals, the Criminal Appeal Act 1927 was passed the following year specifically to deal with the Case of Oscar Slater. This is known as a Full Bench, appeals are heard from the High Court of Justiciary, the Sheriff Courts and the District Courts. The High Court also hears appeals in cases referred to it by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. A Court of Criminal Appeal in Northern Ireland was established on the model of the English Court by the Criminal Appeal Act 1930, the Courts of Justice Act 1924 passed after the 1922 Constitution of the Irish Free State established a Court of Criminal Appeal. Until 2014, the Court of Criminal Appeal heard cases which have been appealed from the Circuit Court, Central Criminal Court and it was made up of three judges and has a majority decision. After a 2013 amendment to the 1937 Constitution of Ireland, the Court of Criminal Appeal was superseded by a new Court of Appeal, cornish, W. Clarke, G. Law and Society in England 1750-1950. Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law 425
7.
Senior Courts Act 1981
–
The Senior Courts Act 1981, originally named the Supreme Court Act 1981, is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 established a new Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on 1 October 2009, the former term Supreme Court did not mean the 2009 Supreme Court, but was shorthand for the Supreme Court of Judicature, which comprised the Superior Courts. Although the old superior courts are now senior courts, the courts have not become junior courts. The following directions have been given pursuant to section 75 by the Lord Chief Justice, civil Procedure, Thomson, Sweet & Maxwell
8.
Constitutional Reform Act 2005
–
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The office of Lord Chancellor was reformed to remove the ability of the holder to act as both a government minister and a judge, an arrangement that ran contrary to the idea of separation of powers. Setting up of a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and moving the Law Lords out of the House of Lords to this new court. Other measures relating to the judiciary, including changes to the position of the Lord Chief Justice, the bill caused much controversy and the Lords made amendments to it. Other measures remained generally the same as stated above, the Lord Chancellor remains the custodian of the Great Seal. The bill was approved by both Houses on 21 March 2005, and received Royal Assent on 24 March, the act contains provisions which reform two institutions and one former office of the United Kingdom. The establishment of a Supreme Court is the subject of the act and it had consequences for the House of Lords. The sections contained in Part 3 prescribe that the Supreme Court be composed of 12 judges, the following sections set out the rules for the appointment of future members of the Court. By default, Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed for life, sections 32 to 37 are entitled Terms of Appointment and deal with issues such as tenure, salaries and allowances, resignation and retirement, and pensions. Section 40 additionally sets out that the new Court will assume the jurisdiction of the House of Lords, the following sections deal with practical matters such as procedures, staff, and resources of the new Court and the fees of the judges. The Chief Executive of the Supreme Court must prepare a report on the work. Although the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords is abolished, newly appointed members of the Court take no peerage, instead bearing the formal title Justice of the Supreme Court. Under the act such judges also have a title of Lord or Lady. The Lord Chief Justice replaces the Lord Chancellor as head of the English judiciary, the new Supreme Court sits in a separate building from the Houses of Parliament where the mentioned predecessor judicial committee formerly acted as the UKs final court of appeal. Architect Lord Foster was chosen to design the necessary alterations, the building reopened as the Supreme Court on 1 October 2009. The third part of the act is about the appointment of judges, in 1991 the Law Society had criticized the old system, emphasizing its defects and recommending the establishment of an independent body responsible for appointing judges. The Constitutional Reform Act realized the hopes of the Law Society, section 61 prescribed the creation of the Judicial Appointments Commission, responsible for the appointment of judges for English and Welsh courts. Following sections regulate the structure and the procedures of the Commission, halsburys Statutes, House of Commons Reports on Bills January 2005 Scroll halfway down the page for this bills two reports
9.
Appeal
–
In law, an appeal is the process in which cases are reviewed, where parties request a formal change to an official decision. Appeals function both as a process for error correction as well as a process of clarifying and interpreting law, although appellate courts have existed for thousands of years, common law countries did not incorporate an affirmative right to appeal into their jurisprudence until the 19th century. Appellate courts and other systems of error correction have existed for many millennia, during the first dynasty of Babylon, Hammurabi and his governors served as the highest appellate courts of the land. Ancient Roman law employed a complex hierarchy of courts, where some appeals would be heard by the emperor. Additionally, appellate courts have existed in Japan since at least the Kamakura Shogunate, during this time, the Shogunate established hikitsuke, a high appellate court to aid the state in adjudicating lawsuits. Although some scholars argue that the right to appeal is itself a substantive liberty interest, in fact, commentators have observed that common law jurisdictions were particularly slow to incorporate a right to appeal into either its civil or criminal jurisprudence. Two years later, the right to appeals was extended to criminal cases. Some states, such as Minnesota, still do not formally recognize a right to criminal appeals, although some courts permit appeals at preliminary stages of litigation, most litigants appeal final orders and judgments from lower courts. A fundamental premise of many legal systems is that appellate courts review questions of law de novo, instead, appellate courts will generally defer to the record established by the trial court, unless some error occurred during the fact-finding process. Many jurisdictions provide a statutory or constitutional right for litigants to appeal adverse decisions, however, most jurisdictions also recognize that this right may be waived. In the United States, for example, litigants may waive the right to appeal, as long as the waiver is “considered, unlike trials, appeals are generally presented to a judge, or a panel of judges, rather than a jury. Before making any formal argument, parties will generally submit legal briefs in which the present their arguments. Appellate courts may grant permission for an amicus curiae to submit a brief in support of a particular party or position. After submitting briefs, parties often have the opportunity to present an argument to a judge or panel of judges. During oral arguments, judges often ask question to attorneys to challenge their arguments or to advance their own legal theories, after deliberating in chambers, appellate courts will issue formal opinions that resolve the legal issues presented for review. When considering cases on appeal, appellate courts generally affirm, reverse, some courts maintain a dual function, where they consider both appeals as well as matters of first instance. For example, the Supreme Court of the United States primarily hears cases on appeal, some jurisdictions maintain a system of intermediate appellate courts, which are subject to the review of higher appellate courts. The highest appellate court in a jurisdiction is referred to as a court of last resort
10.
Court of Appeal (England and Wales)
–
Within the English legal system, the Court of Appeal is second only to the Supreme Court. Established in 1875, the Court of Appeal today comprises 39 Lord Justices of Appeal, the Court has two divisions, Criminal and Civil, led by the Lord Chief Justice and Master of the Rolls respectively. Criminal appeals are heard in its Criminal Division, and civil appeals in the Civil Division, the Criminal Division also hears appeals from the Crown Court, while the Civil Division hears appeals from the County Courts and High Court of Justice. Leave to appeal is required either the lower court or the Court of Appeal itself. The appeal system before 1875 was chaotic and this was the subject of a review by the Judicature Commission, established in 1867 to consider the creation of a Supreme Court which was published in 1869. The recommendation was that there should be a system of appeal from all of the High Court divisions. This was instituted by the Judicature Acts, with the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 giving an almost limitless right of appeal to the Lords. The new legal structure provided a single Court of Appeal, which heard appeals from all the various Divisions of the new unified High Court of Justice, after the opening of the Royal Courts of Justice in 1882 the Court of Appeal transferred there, where it remains. The appeals from the County Courts were seen similarly, involving an appeal to the High Court of Justice, the process of leapfrogging, which they had recommended, was eventually brought into force with the Administration of Justice Act 1969. A separate Court of Criminal Appeal had been established in 1908, in 1966 this was merged with its older namesake, establishing the present-day structure of a single Court of Appeal with two Divisions. In the early 1960s there was an exchange between judges and academics in the United Kingdom and United States comparing the process of used in both nations. After a trial in the Court of Appeal, despite the success of this, the court which Lord Denning presided over from 1962 to 1982 was under no pressure and had no inclination to modernise, with liaisons and management handled by clerks with little knowledge. This changed in 1981 with the appointment of a Registrar, John Adams, an academic and lawyer, in July 1996, Lord Woolf published Access to Justice, a report on the accessibility of the courts to the public. Woolf identified civil litigation as being characterised by excessive cost, delay and complexity, and managed to replace the diverse rules with a single set of Civil Procedure Rules. Bowman noted a growing workload and delays, with 14 months between setting down and disposing of a case in 70 percent of cases, the rest taking even longer than that – some had five years. Bowmans recommendations were enacted through statutory provisions, such as Part IV of the Access to Justice Act 1999. In Tanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald 1 WLR1311, Brooke LJ laid down the procedural methods of the Court of Appeal post-Woolf and Bowman. With a few exceptions, such as cases where the liberty of the subject is an issue, permission is required to appeal, the Civil Division deals with all non-criminal cases, and has been part of the Court since its establishment in 1875
11.
Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
–
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is the supreme court in all matters under English and Welsh law, Northern Ireland law and Scottish civil law. It is the court of last resort and the highest appellate court in the United Kingdom, the Supreme Court was established by Part 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 and started work on 1 October 2009. Its jurisdiction over devolution matters had previously exercised by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Because of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, the Supreme Court is much more limited in its powers of review than the constitutional or supreme courts of some other countries. It cannot overturn any primary legislation made by Parliament, however, it can overturn secondary legislation if, for example, that legislation is found to be ultra vires to the powers in primary legislation allowing it to be made. Such a declaration can apply to primary or secondary legislation, the legislation is not overturned by the declaration, and neither Parliament nor the government is required to agree with any such declaration. The current President of the Supreme Court is Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, the Supreme Courts focus is on cases that raise points of law of general public importance. The Supreme Court also determines devolution issues, ordinarily, all twelve justices do not all hear every case. Typically a case is heard by a panel of five justices, the justices are also members of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and spend some of their time in that capacity. The creation of a Supreme Court for the United Kingdom was first mooted in a paper published by the Department of Constitutional Affairs in July 2003. Space within the House of Lords was at a constant premium, the main argument against a new Supreme Court was that the previous system had worked well and kept costs down. Reformers expressed concern that this second main example of a mixture of the legislative, judicial, officials who make or execute laws have an interest in court cases that put those laws to the test. When the state invests judicial authority in those officials or even their colleagues, it puts the independence. Lord Phillips said such an outcome was a possibility, but was unlikely, the reforms were controversial and were brought forward with little consultation but were subsequently extensively debated in Parliament. During 2004, a committee of the House of Lords scrutinised the arguments for. The Government estimated the set-up cost of the Supreme Court at £56.9 million, the Supreme Court was established by Part 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 and started work on 1 October 2009. Its jurisdiction over devolution matters had previously held by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The first case heard by the Supreme Court was HM Treasury v Ahmed, at issue was the extent to which Parliament has, by the United Nations Act 1946, delegated to the executive the power to legislate
12.
Royal Courts of Justice
–
The Royal Courts of Justice, commonly called the Law Courts, is a court building in London which houses both the High Court and Court of Appeal of England and Wales. Designed by George Edmund Street, who died before it was completed, it is a grey stone edifice in the Victorian Gothic style built in the 1870s. It is one of the largest courts in Europe and it is located on the Strand within the City of Westminster, near the border with the City of London. It is surrounded by the four Inns of Court, Kings College London, the nearest London Underground stations are Chancery Lane and Temple. The courts within the building are open to the public, although there may be some restrictions depending upon the nature of the cases being heard and those in court who do not have legal representation may receive some assistance within the building. There is a citizens advice bureau based within the Main Hall which provides free, there is also a Personal Support Unit where litigants in person can receive emotional support and practical information about court proceedings. The search for a design for the Law Courts was by way of a competition, an approach to selecting a design. The competition ran from 1866-7 and the twelve architects competing for the contract each submitted designs for the site, in 1868 it was finally decided that George Edmund Street was the winner. Building was started in 1873 by Messrs Bull & Sons of Southampton, there was a serious strike of masons at an early stage which threatened to extend to the other trades and caused a temporary stoppage of the works. In consequence, foreign workmen were brought in – mostly Germans and this aroused bitter hostility on the part of the men on strike, and the newcomers had to be housed and fed within the building. However, these disputes were settled and the building took eight years to complete. Street died before the building was opened, overcome by the work, much of the preparatory legal work was completed by Edwin Wilkins Field including promotion of the Courts of Justice Building Act of 1865 and the Courts of Justice Concentration Act of 1865. A statue of Field stands in the building, parliament paid £1,453,000 for the 6-acre site upon which 450 houses had to be demolished. The building was paid for by cash accumulated in court from the estates of the intestate to the sum of £700,000. Oak work and fittings in the court cost a further £70,000 and with decoration, the dimensions of the building are,470 feet from east to west,460 feet from north to south,245 feet from the Strand level to the tip of the fleche. Entering through the gates on the Strand, one passes under two elaborately carved porches fitted with iron gates. The carving over the porch consists of heads of the most eminent judges. Also at the front, over the Judges entrance are a stone cat
13.
Crown Court
–
The Crown Court of England and Wales is, together with the High Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal, one of the constituent parts of the Senior Courts of England and Wales. It is the court of first instance in criminal cases, however, for some purposes the Crown Court is hierarchically subordinate to the High Court. The Crown Court sits in around 92 locations in England and Wales, the administration of the Crown Court is conducted through HM Courts and Tribunals Service. Previously conducted across six circuits, HM Courts and Tribunals Service is now divided into seven regions, Midlands, North East, North West, South East, South West, London and Wales. The Wales region was identified separately, having regard to the legislative powers of the Welsh Assembly Government. When the Crown Court sits in the City of London it is known as the Central Criminal Court, the average time from receipt by the Crown Court to completion was 177 days by the start of 2016. Rather than speaking of a location at which the Crown Court sits, it is practice to refer to any venue as a Crown Court. In 2015 the Crown Court heard 11,348 appeals against conviction, at the conclusion of the hearing the Crown Court has the power to confirm, reverse or vary any part of the decision under appeal. The average waiting time for appeals was 8.8 weeks in 2015, in 2015 the Crown Court dealt with 30,802 cases for sentencing from the magistrates courts. Committals may also arise from breaches of the terms of a Community Rehabilitation Order or a sentence of imprisonment. The court performance target is that cases committed for sentence should be heard within 10 weeks, when the Crown Court is dealing with a matter connected with a trial on indictment, appeal lies to the criminal division of the Court of Appeal and thence to the Supreme Court. In all other cases, appeal from the Crown Court lies by way of case stated to a Divisional Court of the High Court, the judges who normally sit in the Crown Court are High Court judges, Circuit judges and Recorders. Circuit judges also sit in the County Court, Recorders are barristers or solicitors in private practice, who sit part-time as judges. The most serious cases are allocated to High Court judges and Senior Circuit judges, the remainder are dealt with by Circuit judges and Recorders, although Recorders will normally handle less serious work than Circuit judges. The allocation is conducted according to directions given by the Lord Chief Justice of England, the Crown Court was established on 1 January 1972 by the Courts Act 1971, acting on the recommendations of the commission. The quarter sessions were local courts assembled four times a year to dispose of cases which were not serious enough to go before a High Court judge. The Crown Court and a county court may sit in the same building, since the establishment of Her Majestys Courts Service in April 2005 there is an increased sharing of facilities between the Crown Court, county courts and magistrates courts. At the front of the court, on a platform, is a large bench
14.
Courts of England and Wales
–
The United Kingdom does not have a single unified legal system—England and Wales have one system, Scotland another, and Northern Ireland a third. Additionally, the Military Court Service has jurisdiction over all members of the forces of the United Kingdom in relation to offences against military law. The Supreme Court is the highest appeal court in almost all cases in England, before the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 this role was held by the House of Lords. The Supreme Court is also the highest court of appeal for devolution matters, the Privy Council is the highest court of appeal for a small number of Commonwealth countries, colonies and the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. There are a number of smaller jurisdictions, such as appeals from ecclesiastical and professional bodies. The judges who sit on the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council are also the members of the Supreme Court, the Senior Courts of England and Wales were originally created by the Judicature Acts as the Supreme Court of Judicature. It was renamed the Supreme Court of England and Wales in 1981 and it consists of the following courts, Court of Appeal High Court of Justice Crown Court The Court of Appeal deals only with appeals from other courts or tribunals. Its decisions are binding on all courts, including itself, apart from the Supreme Court, the High Court of Justice functions both as a civil court of first instance and a criminal and civil appellate court for cases from the subordinate courts. It consists of three divisions, the Queens Bench, the Chancery and the Family divisions, the divisions of the High Court are not separate courts, but have somewhat separate procedures and practices adapted to their purposes. Although particular kinds of cases will be assigned to each depending on their subject matter. However, beginning proceedings in the division may result in a costs penalty. The Crown Court is a court of both original and appellate jurisdiction which in addition handles a limited amount of civil business both at first instance and on appeal. It was established by the Courts Act 1971 and it replaced the assizes whereby High Court judges would periodically travel around the country hearing cases, and quarter sessions which were periodic county courts. The Old Bailey is the name of Londons most famous criminal court. Its official name is the Central Criminal Court, the Crown Court also hears appeals from magistrates courts. The Crown Court is a court in respect of the other work it undertakes, viz. inter alia, appeals from the magistrates’ courts. They hear minor criminal cases, as well as certain licensing appeals, youth courts are run on similar lines to adult magistrates courts but deal with offenders aged between the ages of ten and seventeen inclusive. Youth courts are presided over by a specially trained subset of experienced adult magistrates or a district judge, youth magistrates have a wider catalogue of disposals available to them for dealing with young offenders and often hear more serious cases against youths
15.
Queen's Bench
–
The Queens Bench is the superior court in a number of jurisdictions within some of the Commonwealth realms. The original Kings Bench, founded in 1215 in England, was one of the ancient courts of the land and is now a division of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales. The Court of Queens Bench is the court in several Canadian provinces, including, Alberta, Manitoba, New Brunswick. There was formerly a Court of Kings Bench created in the British colony of Quebec in 1764 and it was then abolished and re-established in 1777, following the Quebec Act. Following the separation of Upper and Lower Canada in 1791, the court was replaced by several courts of Kings bench of each region of the two new provinces. In 1849, the districts in were reunited once again, in England and Wales, the Court of Kings Bench was the name of two courts. Each was a court of common law, with civil and criminal jurisdiction. The English Court of Queens Bench was abolished in 1875 by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873, the Courts jurisdiction passed in each case to a new High Court of Justice and specifically to the Queens Bench Division of that court. The Irish Court of Queens Bench was abolished by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1877, the Queens Bench jurisdiction is now vested in the Queens Bench Division of the High Court in Northern Ireland. There is a Queens Bench Division as a division of the High Court of England and Wales, in England and Wales, the Queens Bench Division is part of the High Court of Justice. It was created by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873, in 1880 the former Common Pleas and Exchequer Divisions were merged into the Queens Bench Division. Since 1882 the High Court has sat in the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand, in Northern Ireland the Queens Bench Division is part of the High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland, first created by Section 40 of the Government of Ireland Act 1920. The Division has similar jurisdiction to its counterpart in England and Wales and it sits in the Royal Courts of Justice, Belfast. Other sub-divisions include the Commercial Court, the Admiralty Court and the Administrative Court, the abbreviation QB in legal citation is used in the Law Reports to denote cases heard in the Queens Bench Division. There are masters in the Queens Bench Division, unlike the masters in the Chancery Division, the Queens Bench masters have original jurisdiction and they hear applications in chambers, act as taxing masters and occasionally as referees to conduct inquiries, take accounts, and assess damages. The Court of Queens Bench grew out of the Kings Court, or Curia Regis, at an unknown point, another court, independent of the Kings personal presence, grew out of the Curia Regis, and consisted of a number of royal judges who would hear cases themselves. In practice pleas of the Crown were heard only in the Kings Bench, the Lord Chief Justice of the Kings Bench was also styled Lord Chief Justice of England, being the highest permanent judge of the Crown. The Kings Bench became a court sitting in Westminster Hall
16.
Judicature Acts
–
The Judicature Acts are a series of Acts of Parliament, beginning in the 1870s, which aimed to fuse the hitherto split system of courts in England and Wales. The first two Acts were the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873 and the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1875, the enactment was bold and revolutionary. By one section, the Queens Bench, the Common Pleas, and the Exchequer, nevertheless, all actions could now for the first time be initiated in a single High Court, and could be tried in any of its divisions. The procedure of the law courts had developed along highly technical. For example, to bring an action in the law courts a litigant had to file a writ chosen from a set of standard forms. The emphasis on adherence to established forms led to substantial injustice. However, by the nineteenth century proceedings before the Court of Chancery often dragged on and on, also, the practice of the court departed from the original principle of the Lord Chancellors conscience, with rules of equity restricting the manner in which the courts of equity would intervene. The solution adopted by the Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875 was to fuse the administration of the two, pleadings became more relaxed, with the emphasis shifting from the form of action to the cause of action. Writs for action were filled out for a litigant stating facts, the result was that, when the issues arising from the causes of action were decided in favour of one party, that party got relief. There were originally three common law divisions of the High Court corresponding with the three courts of common law. 25, all the jurisdiction of the Chief Baron and the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas was transferred. The High Court, therefore, came to consist of the Chancery division, the law division. To the Queens Bench division was attached, by an order of the Lord Chancellor dated 1 January 1884. The keystone of the created by the Judicature Acts was a strong court of appeal. The authors of the Judicature Act had before them two systems of pleading, both of which were open to criticism, there was some exaggeration in both statements. In a normal case, the plaintiff delivered his statement of claim, in which he was to set forth concisely the facts on which he relied, and the relief which he asked. The defendant then delivered his statement of defence, in which he was to say whether he admitted or denied the plaintiffs facts, the plaintiff might then reply, and the defendant rejoin, and so on until the pleaders had exhausted themselves. In the chancery division there are of course no pleadings in those matters which by the rules can be disposed of by summons in chambers instead of by ordinary suit as formerly
17.
Judicial functions of the House of Lords
–
The House of Lords, in addition to having a legislative function, historically also had a judicial function. It functioned as a court of first instance for the trials of peers, for impeachment cases, in the latter case the Houses jurisdiction was essentially limited to the hearing of appeals from the lower courts. Appeals were technically not to the House of Lords, but rather to the Queen-in-Parliament, during the 20th and early 21st centuries, the judicial functions were gradually removed. The final trial of a peer in the House of Lords was in 1935, and in 1948, in 2009 the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom assumed the functions as the new court of final appeal in the UK. Parliaments role in deciding litigation originated from the role of the Royal Court. Parliament grew out of the Court and took on many of its roles, Parliament originally did not hear appeals as a court might, rather, it heard petitions for the judgments of lower courts to be reversed. The House of Commons ceased considering such petitions in 1399, leaving the House of Lords, effectively, the Lords jurisdiction later began to decline, only five cases were heard between 1514 and 1589, and no cases between 1589 and 1621. In 1621, the House of Lords resumed its judicial role when King James I sent the petition of Edward Ewer, Petitions for the House of Lords to review the decisions of lower courts began to increase once again. After Ewer,13 further cases would be heard in 1621, the House of Lords appointed a Committee for Petitions. At first, the Clerk of the Parliaments would bring petitions to the House, as the number of petitions increased, the Committee gained the power to reject petitions itself. Petitions to the House of Lords did not have to seek reversal of lower court judgments, often, the practice of bringing cases directly to the Lords, however, ended with the case of Thomas Skinner v. East India Company. In 1667, the King, Charles II, referred the case to the Lords after failed attempts at arbitration, replying to Skinners petition, the East India Company objected that the case was one of first instance, and that the Lords therefore should not have accepted it. Notwithstanding the Companys protests, the House of Lords proceeded with the matter, though lawyers argued that the House could intervene only after the lower courts had failed to remedy the case, the Lords decided in Skinners favour in 1668. The East India Company then petitioned the House of Commons, arguing that the acceptance of a case in the first instance by the Lords was unusual and extraordinary. A famous dispute then broke out between the two Houses, the Commons ordered the imprisonment of Thomas Skinner and the Lords retaliated by ordering the imprisonment of the Company Chairman, in 1670, Charles II requested both Houses to abandon the case. When they refused, he ordered all references to the case be expunged from the Journals of both Houses and that neither body continue with the dispute. The House of Lords then ceased to hear petitions in the first instance, even after Skinners Case was resolved, the House of Lords and House of Commons clashed over jurisdiction in 1675. The House of Commons felt that the upper House had breached its privileges by considering cases in which members of the House of Commons were defendants, after the Lords considered Shirley v. Fagg, the Commons warned the Lords to have regard for their Privileges
18.
Court of Chancery
–
The Court of Chancery was a court of equity in England and Wales that followed a set of loose rules to avoid the slow pace of change and possible harshness of the common law. The Chancery had jurisdiction over all matters of equity, including trusts, land law, the administration of the estates of lunatics and the guardianship of infants. Thus the Court of Chancery had a far greater remit than the law courts, whose decisions it had the jurisdiction to overrule for much of its existence. From the time of Elizabeth I onwards the Court was severely criticised for its pace, large backlogs. Those problems persisted until its dissolution, despite being mitigated somewhat by reforms, for much of its existence the Court was formally led by the Lord Chancellor, assisted by the judges of the common law courts. The staff of the court included a number of clerks, led by the Master of the Rolls. In 1813 a Vice-Chancellor was appointed to deal with the Chancerys increasing backlogs, offices of the Chancery were sold by the Lord Chancellor for much of its history, raising large amounts of money. The Court of Chancery originated, as did the other High Courts before 1875, in the Norman curia regis or Kings Council, maintained by most early rulers of England after 1066. Under the feudal system, the Council was made up of the Monarch and its jurisdiction was virtually unlimited, with executive, judicial and legislative functions. This large body contained lawyers, peers, and members of the Church and it soon became apparent that it was too unwieldy to deal with the nations day-to-day business. The Chancery started as the staff of the Lord Chancellor, described as a great secretarial bureau, a home office, a foreign office. The Chancery came to prominence after the decline of the Exchequer, dealing with the law of equity, something more fluid, complaints were normally brought via a bill or petition, which had to show that the common law did not provide a remedy for the problem. The Chancery writs were in French, and later English, rather than the Latin used for common law bills, in the reign of Edward III, the Court found a fixed home at Westminster Hall, where it sat almost continually until its dissolution. Prior to this, the disposing of justice had been made difficult by the fact that the Lord Chancellor was required to travel with the King wherever he went. By 1345 the Lord Chancellor began to be seen as the leader of the Court of Chancery, rather than as a representative of the King, and writs and bills were addressed directly to him. Under Richard II it became practice to consider the Chancery separate from the curia, the King gave evasive answers to the requests, and made no decision. Kerly suggests that many complaints from the Commons came from lawyers of the common law, the growth in the number of is a primary indicator of the changing position of Chancery. Chancery English, used in documents, can be seen as the beginnings of Standard English – a national standard of spelling
19.
Court of Common Pleas (England)
–
The Court of Common Pleas, or Common Bench, was a common law court in the English legal system that covered common pleas, actions between subject and subject, which did not concern the king. Created in the late 12th to early 13th century after splitting from the Exchequer of Pleas, authorised by Magna Carta to sit in a fixed location, the Common Pleas sat in Westminster Hall for its entire existence, joined by the Exchequer of Pleas and Court of Kings Bench. The courts jurisdiction was gradually undercut by the Kings Bench and Exchequer of Pleas with legal fictions, the Bill of Middlesex and Writ of Quominus respectively. It was staffed by one Chief Justice and a number of puisne justices, who were required to be Serjeants-at-Law. With an Order in Council issued on 16 December 1880, the Common Pleas Division of the High Court ceased to exist, marking the end of the Court of Common Pleas. Originally, the sole fixed court was the curia regis, one of the three administrative bodies along with the Exchequer and Chancery, from which the Court of Chancery formed. This curia was the court, composed of those advisers and courtiers who followed the king as he travelled around the country. This was not a court of law, instead a descendant of the witenagemot. In concert with the curia regis, eyre circuits staffed by itinerant judges dispensed justice throughout the country and these judges were also members of the curia, and would hear cases on the kings behalf in the lesser curia regis. Gradually, the split into two distinct branches, the coram rege and de banco. Much academic discussion occurs over the circumstances and times of their founding, the later theory was that Henry IIs decree created the Court of Common Pleas, not the Kings Bench, and that the Kings Bench instead split from the Common Pleas at some later time. In the 20th century, with access to historical documents. Rather than the Common Pleas being created out of the curia regis directly, it arose out of the Exchequer of Pleas. The Court of Common Pleas, along with the superior courts. The court sat in a space marked off by a bar with the court officials sitting at a large oak table covered in green cloth. During the 15th century, the law courts were challenged by the civil law and equity found in the Chancery. These courts and legal methods were much faster than the law courts, so lawyers. When the Kings Bench attempted to use the Bill of Middlesex to widen its jurisdiction, the troubles during this period are best illustrated by Slades Case
20.
Exchequer of Pleas
–
The Exchequer of Pleas or Court of Exchequer was a court that dealt with matters of equity, a set of legal principles based on natural law and common law in England and Wales. Originally part of the curia regis, or Kings Council, the Exchequer of Pleas split from the curia during the 1190s, to sit as an independent, the Court of Chancerys reputation for tardiness and expense resulted in much of its business transferring to the Exchequer. As a result, the Exchequer lost its equity jurisdiction, with the Judicature Acts, the Exchequer was formally dissolved as a judicial body by an Order in Council of 16 December 1880. The Exchequers jurisdiction, at times, was common law, equity. Cases were formally taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but in practice were heard by the Barons of the Exchequer, judicial officials led by the Chief Baron. Other court officials included the Kings Remembrancer, who appointed all officials and kept the Exchequers records, and the sworn and side clerks. The first reliable records come from the time of Henry I, the curia regis followed the king as he travelled rather than sitting at any one fixed location, and was held in York, London and Northampton at various times. The word Exchequer derives from the chequered cloth laid on a table for the purposes of counting money, although the Exchequer of Pleas was the first common law court, it was also the last to separate from the curia regis. There are few known to date from before 1580, as bills were not dated before then. Until the 16th century, the Exchequer carried out its duties with little variation in its function or practice. A small court, the Exchequer handled around 250 cases a year, under the Tudors, however, the Exchequers political, judicial and fiscal importance all increased. The appointment of the second and third Dukes of Norfolk as Lord High Treasurers from 1501 to 1546 led to a reduction in the Exchequers power. When William Paulet was appointed Treasurer in 1546 the Exchequer again increased in power, absorbing the Court of Augmentations and Court of First Fruits, fanshawes administrative reforms were considered excellent, and his work continued to be used as the standard until the 1830s. Exchequer business increased under James and Charles I, before the English Civil War disrupted the courts, as a result, the Exchequer increased in importance as a court, although it is not known whether its active transformation was a judicial or political decision. By the beginning of the 18th century, the equity jurisdiction of the Exchequer of Pleas was firmly cemented, as a result, each court cited the others cases as precedent, and drew closely together. In addition, 18th-century Acts of Parliament treated them in the same way, at the same time, the Treasury became more and more important, leading to a reduction in the inferior Exchequers influence. Despite these warning signs, the Exchequer continued to flourish, maintaining a large amount of business, the Court of Chancery, however, had long had an established method of appealing to the Lords, and later introduced an intermediary appellate court – the Court of Appeal in Chancery. The Exchequers fees were also higher than those of the Court of Chancery, as a result, the Administration of Justice Act 1841 formally dissolved the equitable jurisdiction of the court
21.
Admiralty court
–
Admiralty courts, also known as maritime courts, are courts exercising jurisdiction over all maritime contracts, torts, injuries, and offenses. Englands Admiralty Courts date to at least the 1360s, during the reign of Edward III, at that time there were three such Courts, appointed by Admirals responsible for waters to the north, south and west of England. In 1483 these local courts were amalgamated into a single High Court of Admiralty, the Lord High Admiral directly appointed judges to the court, and could remove them at will. From its inception in 1483 until 1657 the Court sat in a church in Southwark, and from then until 1665 in Montjoy House. In order to escape the Great Plague of London in 1665, the plague threat having subsided by 1666, the Court returned to London and until 1671 was located at Exeter House on The Strand before returning to Montjoy House near St Pauls. During the period after the French and Indian War, Admiralty Courts became an issue that was a part of the tension between the British Parliament and their American Colonies. Starting with the Proclamation of 1763, these courts were given jurisdiction over a number of laws affecting the colonies, the jurisdiction was expanded in later acts of the Parliament, such as the Stamp Act of 1765. The colonists objections were based on several factors, the courts could try a case anywhere in the British Empire. Cases involving New York or Boston merchants were frequently heard in Nova Scotia, the fact that judges were paid based in part on the fines that they levied and naval officers were paid for bringing successful cases led to abuses. There was no trial by jury, and evidence standards were weaker than in criminal courts, the governments objective was to improve the effectiveness of revenue and excise tax laws. In many past instances, smugglers would avoid taxes, even when they were caught and brought to trial, local judges frequently acquitted the popular local merchants whom they perceived as being unfairly accused by an unpopular tax collector. Cases were decided by judges rather than juries, in 1875, the High Court of Admiralty governing England and Wales was absorbed into the new Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division of the High Court. When these judges sat, it became convenient to call the sitting the Admiralty Court, today Admiralty jurisdiction is exercised by the United Kingdoms High Court of Justice. The admiralty laws which are applied in this court is based upon the civil law-based Law of the Sea, with statutory, the Admiralty court is now housed in the Rolls Building. The Scottish Courts earliest records, held in West Register House in Edinburgh, from 1702 the Judge of the court was also authorised to appoint deputies to hear lesser matters or to deputise during his absence. The Scottish Courts workload was small until the mid-eighteenth century, with judges hearing no more than four matters in each sitting, after the 1750s the volume of cases rose until by 1790 it was necessary to maintain a daily log of decisions. Cases reflected Scotlands principal marine industries including the transshipment of sugar and tobacco, a smaller number of cases related to smuggling, principally brandy, and to salvage rights for ships wrecked on Scottish shores. The Court ceased operation in 1832 and its functions were subsumed into the Court of Session and this office is normally held by a High Court Judge who holds the appointment of Admiralty Judge
22.
English law
–
English law is the common law legal system governing England and Wales, comprising criminal law and civil law. English law has no formal codification, the essence of English common law is that it is made by judges sitting in courts applying statute, and legal precedent from previous cases. A decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, the highest civil court of the United Kingdom, is binding on every other court. Some rulings are derived from legislation, others, known as law, are based on rulings of previous courts. For example, murder is a common law rather than one established by an Act of Parliament. Common law can be amended or repealed by Parliament, murder, for example, the first schedule of the Interpretation Act 1978, defines the following terms, British Islands, England, and United Kingdom. The use of the term British Isles is virtually obsolete in statutes and, for interpretation purposes, England includes a number of specified elements, Wales and Berwick Act 1746, section 3 formally incorporated Wales and Berwick-upon-Tweed into England. But section 4 Welsh Language Act 1967 provided that references to England in future Acts of Parliament should no longer include Wales, but Dicey & Morris say It seems desirable to adhere to Diceys definition for reasons of convenience and especially of brevity. It would be cumbersome to have to add or Wales after England, the adjacent islands of the Isle of Wight and Anglesey are a part of England and Wales by custom, while Harman v Bolt 47 TLR219 expressly confirms that Lundy is a part of England. The adjacent territorial waters by virtue of the Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act 1878, great Britain means England, Wales, Scotland, their adjacent territorial waters and the islands of Orkney and Shetland, the Hebrides and, by virtue of the Island of Rockall Act 1972, Rockall. V Canon Film Sales Ltd.1 WLR1597 and Chloride Industrial Batteries Ltd, V F. & W. Freight Ltd.1 WLR823. British Islands – but not British Isles – means the United Kingdom, the Isle of Man, compare with American convention, which includes of, as in Civil Rights Act of 1964. For example, the Pleading in English Act 1362 was referred to as 36 Edw,15, meaning 36th year of the reign of Edward III, chapter 15, though in the past this was all spelt out, together with the long title. Common law is a term with historical origins in the system of England. This may be a legacy of the Norman conquest of England, an example is the Law Merchant derived from the Pie-Powder Courts, named from a corruption of the French pieds-poudrés implying ad hoc marketplace courts. In 1276, the concept of time immemorial often applied in common law was defined as being any time before 6 July 1189, one of the major challenges in the early centuries was to produce a system that was certain in its operation and predictable in its outcomes. Too many judges were either partial or incompetent, acquiring their positions only by virtue of their rank in society, thus, a standardised procedure slowly emerged, based on a system termed stare decisis which roughly means let the decision stand. The doctrine of precedent which requires similar cases to be adjudicated in a like manner, thus, the ratio decidendi of each case will bind future cases on the same generic set of facts both horizontally and vertically in the court structure
23.
Ministry of Justice (United Kingdom)
–
The Ministry of Justice is a ministerial department of the UK Government headed by the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor. The department is responsible for areas of constitutional policy not transferred in 2010 to the Deputy Prime Minister, human rights law. The ministry was formed in May 2007 when some functions of the Home Secretary were combined with the Department for Constitutional Affairs, the latter had replaced the Lord Chancellors Department in 2003. Its stated priorities are to reduce re-offending and protect the public, to access to justice, to increase confidence in the justice system. Responsibility for devolution was then transferred to the position of Deputy Prime Minister. The Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Justice have joint responsibility for a commission on a British bill of rights, the vast majority of the Ministry of Justices work takes place in England and Wales. The ministry has no responsibility for devolved criminal justice policy, courts, the ministry is therefore responsible for all aspects of the criminal law, including the scope and content of criminal offences. The prison population in England and Wales has risen because politicians of both parties wanted to show they were tough on criminals and this led to overcrowding and increase in other problems like violence, self-harm and suicide. The Ministry of Justice is the department that facilitates communication between the Crown dependencies i. e. Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man, and the UK Government. These are self-governing possessions of the British monarch, through her titles as Duke of Normandy in the Channel Islands and it processes legislation for Royal Assent passed by the insular legislative assemblies and consults with the Islands on extending UK legislation to them. It also ensures that relevant UK legislation is extended to the islands smoothly, the Ministry has outlined its aims for the 2011–15 Parliament in its structural reform plan, which commits the department to,1. Develop court reforms to improve the resolution of disputes, maximise efficiency and improve services and work with others to make delivery of justice more effective. Assure better law Assure that law-making is transparent and accountable, safeguarding civil liberties, Reform how the ministry delivers its services Reform the way the Ministry of Justice works. Reassess its ways of working to develop more efficient shared services, match its provision ever more closely to demand, reduce duplication, the departmental board has overall responsibility for delivery of the structural reform plan. It publishes progress against the plan on the 10 Downing Street website, official website Ministry of Justice resources for legal professionals Ministry of Justice organogram from data. gov. uk
24.
Secretary of State for Justice
–
On 9 May 2007, the Department for Constitutional Affairs was abolished, and a Ministry of Justice was created in its place. The Ministry of Justice is also responsible for certain functions transferred from the Home Office, the then Lord Chancellor, Charlie Falconer, was appointed to the post of Secretary of State for Justice on the abolition of his position as Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs. The Home Secretary, John Reid, told Parliament that future Secretaries of State for Justice would be MPs rather than peers and he was replaced by Conservative MP Ken Clarke. In the Cabinet reshuffle of August 2012 Chris Grayling MP was promoted to Lord Chancellor and, by convention, after the 2015 UK General election, the position was given to former Government Chief Whip Michael Gove MP. Michael Gove was sacked after Theresa May became Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on 14 July 2016 and succeeded by Liz Truss
25.
Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service
–
Her Majestys Courts and Tribunals Service is an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice. It was created on 1 April 2011 by the merger of Her Majestys Courts Service and it works from about 600 locations across the United Kingdom. The courts over which it has responsibility are the Court of Appeal, the High Court, the Crown Court, the courts. The Chief Executive is responsible for the operations and administration of the agency. Her Majestys Courts and Tribunals Service is an agency, in contrast with the Scottish Court Service which is not subject to the control of a Minister in any way. However, it is unique in being such an agency and having constitutional accountability to judges as well as the Lord Chancellor, the framework document says that the agency is accountable to the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales and the Senior President of Tribunals. This provides a unique partnership between all three in relation to the governance, financing and operation of Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service. For example, where the Board cannot reach agreement, its Chair will refer the issue in question to the Lord Chancellor, any amendment of the framework document must be agreed between all parties, and laid before Parliament. Furthermore, the Lord Chief Justice is entitled to terminate the partnership if either concludes that it is no longer compatible with his position or the independence of the judiciary. Incumbent Her Majestys Courts and Tribunals Service website Her Majestys Courts and Tribunals Service Guidance website Judiciary of England and Wales website Crime and justice
26.
Judges' Council
–
The Judges Council is a body in England and Wales that, representing the judiciary, advises the Lord Chief Justice on judicial matters. It has its roots in the original Council of the Judges of the Supreme Court. This was criticised on the grounds that the judges might do so ineffectively or slowly, the 1873 bills eventual clauses contained, thanks to the influence of Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, provisions for the creation of a Council of the Judges of the Supreme Court. This Council would oversee the new system, reviewing its workings yearly. The Council first met on 6 June 1874, providing recommendations for the circuit courts, in 1892 the Council considered further reform of the court system to deal with growing backlogs in the Chancery Division and the cost of appeals to the House of Lords. After this the council met irregularly, only twice between 1900 and 1907, there was a ten-year gap between meetings in 1940 and 1950 respectively, and little was done. Denis Dobson, Permanent Secretary to the Lord Chancellors Office, suggested this was because other bodies now existed to do what the Council had been created to achieve, in 1986 Lord Donaldson and Professor I. R. Scott campaigned for a new, non-statutory, Judges Council, arguing that the judiciary had no representative body, at the same time, Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson published a paper that the executives financial and managerial control over the judiciary was having a negative effect on judicial independence. On 11 January 1988 the proposal for a new Judges Council was discussed at the meeting of the High Court of Justice. The new Council was described in Parliament as, An independent body without a formal constitution and it has no statutory basis, exercises no executive functions and controls no public expenditure. It meets to discuss issues of concern to the judiciary and to represents to the views of the senior judiciary to the Lord Chancellor and other individuals. It is wholly independent of Government and is only to those whose views it represents. Its membership is a matter for the Council itself and those whose views it represents, the Councils initial remit was to promote co-operation between the judiciary and executive, maintain judicial independence and make court procedure more efficient. To this end, it was composed of the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls, the Council adopted a written constitution in 2002, and has considerably widened its membership to include representatives from other parts of the judiciary. Each level of the judiciary is represented in the Judges Council, the composition, as of January 2017, is, The Lord Chief Justice of England & Wales – The Rt. The Lord Thomas Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice – The Rt, Sir Terence Etherton President of the Queen’s Bench Division – The Rt. Sir Brian Leveson President of the Family Division and Head of Family Justice – The Rt, Sir James Munby The Chancellor of the High Court – The Rt. Sir Geoffrey Vos The Vice President of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division – The Rt, lady Justice Hallett DBE The Chairman of the Judicial College - The Rt
27.
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
–
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is one of the highest judicial bodies in the United Kingdom. The Judicial Committee consists of judges appointed as Privy Councillors, predominantly Justices of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. It is often referred to as the Privy Council, as in most cases appeals are made to Her Majesty in Council. The panel of judges hearing a case is known as the Board. The report of the Board is always accepted by the Queen in Council as judgment, in Commonwealth republics retaining the JCPC as their final court of appeal, appeals are made directly to the Judicial Committee itself. In the case of Brunei, appeals are made to the Sultan of Brunei, formerly the Judicial Committee gave a unanimous report, but since the Judicial Committee Order 1966 dissenting opinions have been allowed. The Judicial Committees permanent home is in London, in the United Kingdom, in this renovated building, Court 3 is used for Privy Council sittings. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has jurisdiction in the domestic matters. Appeals from the courts in non-doctrinal faculty cases. Appeals from the High Court of Chivalry, Appeals from the Court of Admiralty of the Cinque Ports. Appeals from the Disciplinary Committee of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, disputes under the House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975. Additionally, the government may refer any issue to the committee for consideration, in other courts in the United Kingdom, judgments of the Judicial Committee are only of persuasive authority and are not binding as a matter of law. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is the Court of Final Appeal for the Church of England. It hears appeals from the Arches Court of Canterbury and the Chancery Court of York, except on matters of doctrine, ritual or ceremony, which go to the Court for Ecclesiastical Causes Reserved. By the Church Discipline Act 1840 and the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 all archbishops and bishops of the Church of England became eligible to be members of the Judicial Committee. Prior to the coming into force of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, on 1 October 2009 this jurisdiction was transferred to the new Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The New Zealand associated states of Cook Islands and Niue, the Crown Dependencies of Jersey, Guernsey, including Guernseys own dependencies of Alderney and Sark, and appeals from the Staff of Government Division on the Isle of Man. The United Kingdoms Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, in Cyprus, Appeal is directly to the Judicial Committee from three independent Commonwealth republics, Mauritius and Trinidad and Tobago, and also, if the case involves constitutional rights, Kiribati
28.
Master of the Rolls
–
The position dates from at least 1286, although it is believed that the office probably existed earlier than that. The Master of the Rolls was initially a clerk responsible for keeping the Rolls, or records, of the Court of Chancery, the Keeper was the most senior of the dozen Chancery clerks, and as such occasionally acted as keeper of the Great Seal of the Realm. The post evolved into a one as the Court of Chancery did. He retained his functions as the nominal head of the Public Record Office until the Public Records Act 1958 transferred responsibility for it to the Lord Chancellor. One residual reminder of this role is the fact that the Master of the Rolls of the day continues to serve, ex officio, the Master of the Rolls was also previously responsible for registering solicitors, the officers of the Senior Courts. One of the most prominent people to hold the position was Thomas Cromwell, on 3 October 2016, Sir Terence Etherton succeeded Lord Dyson as Master of the Rolls. Category, Masters of the Rolls Hanworth, Lord, some Notes on the Office of Master of the Rolls. The Judges of England 1272–1990, a list of judges of the superior courts
29.
High Court judge (England and Wales)
–
High Court judges are referred to as puisne judges. High Court Judges wear red and black robes, upon appointment all High Court judges are knighted, or in the case of female judges made Dames Commander of the Order of the British Empire. So, for example, Nigel Bridge became Sir Nigel Bridge, in court, a High Court judge is referred to as My Lord or Your Lordship if male, or as My Lady or Your Ladyship if female. High Court judges use the title in office of Mr Justice for men or, normally, when, however, Dame Alison Russell was appointed in 2014, she took the title Ms Justice Russell. The style of The Honourable is also used during office, for example, Sir Joseph Bloggs would be referred to as The Hon Mr Justice Bloggs Kt. and Dame Jane Bloggs DBE as The Hon Mrs Justice Bloggs DBE, for as long as they continue to hold office. When there is already or has recently been a judge with the same surname as a new appointee. Many judges have done this, such as Mr Justice Christopher Clarke, when referring to a High Court judge in a legal context, the judge is identified by use of the surname, followed by the letter J. For example, Mr Justice Bloggs or Mrs Justice Bloggs would be referred to as Bloggs J, where several judges are listed the double letters JJ are used, for example, Bloggs, Smith and Jones JJ. High Court judges, as with the other Senior Judiciary are appointed by The Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister, under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 a new Judicial Appointments Commission has removed the appointment of judges from the political arena. High Court judges, as with other judges, are now appointed on the basis of open competition, High Court judges, as with all judges in England and Wales, hold office during good behaviour, this is laid down in the Bill of Rights 1689. A High Court judge can only be removed by the Queen upon an Address of both Houses of Parliament, formerly, High Court judges could only be appointed from among barristers of at least 10 years standing. Before the qualifications changed, a typical appointee had in the region of twenty to thirty years experience as a lawyer. Only four solicitors had been appointed as puisne judges – Michael Sachs in 1993, Lawrence Collins in 2000, Henry Hodge in 2004, Collins was elevated further to the Court of Appeal in 2007 and became a law lord in 2009. A few distinguished academics have made it on to the High Court bench, including Mrs Justice Hale and, more recently. List of High Court Judges of England and Wales Judicial titles in England and Wales Judiciary of England and Wales
30.
County court
–
Since 2014, England and Wales have had what is officially described as a single civil court named the County Court, with unlimited financial jurisdiction. However it should be understood there are County Court buildings and courtrooms throughout England and Wales. It is a civil court in the sense of a single centrally organised and administered court system. County court districts did not have the boundaries as counties. Today the court sits in many County Court centres, currently corresponding to the old county courts. County Court matters can be lodged at a court in person, cases are normally heard at the court having jurisdiction over the area where the claimant lives. Most matters are decided by a judge or circuit judge sitting alone. Civil matters in England do not have juries, judges in the County Court are either former barristers or former solicitors, whereas in the High Court they are more likely to have formerly been a barrister. Civil claims with an amount in controversy under £10,000 are dealt with in the County Court under the small claims track. Claims between £5,000 and £25,000 that are capable of being tried within one day are allocated to the fast track and claims over £25,000 to the multi track. These tracks are labels for the use of the court system - the actual cases will be heard in the County Court or the High Court depending on their value, for personal injury, defamation, and some landlord-tenant dispute cases the thresholds for each track have different values. Appeals are to a judge, the High Court of Justice or to the Court of Appeal. In debt cases, the aim of a claimant taking County Court action against a defendant is to secure a County Court judgment and this is a legal order to pay the full amount of the debt. County Court judgments are recorded in the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines and this information is used in consumer credit scores, making it difficult or more expensive for the defendant to obtain credit. In order to avoid the record being kept for years in the register, if the debt was not fully paid within the statutory period, the entry will remain for six full years. County court is the given to the intermediate court in some Australian states. They hear indictable criminal offences except for treason, murder, in some states the same level of court is called a district court. Below them are the magistrates courts, above them are the state supreme courts
31.
County Court Business Centre
–
The County Court Business Centre is a centre of the County Court of England and Wales created to deal with claims by the use of various electronic media. Unlike other County Court centres the CCBC does not physically hear cases, if any case might require a hearing it is transferred to another centre. The increasing ubiquity of computers and Internet access led to discussion of allowing greater use of information technology to run court proceedings. In January 1990 the Claim Production Centre was created, with the power to issue and this is currently enshrined within Rule 7.10 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998. All claims issued through the CPC were originally issued in the name of a county court in the way as claims issued in the traditional manner. In March 1992 the CCBC was created to remove the burden of routine matters in simple CPC cases from the county court. The current definition of such matters is contained in Practice Direction 7C, currently both the CPC and CCBC are located in Northampton. Use of the CCBC is available only to members, Membership is free and is available to anyone who successfully demonstrates they can meet the IT requirements of the CCBC. Continued use of the CCBC is subject to the Rules of Membership, cases can be issued through the CCBC in two different ways. Money Claim Online was created in February 2002 and it provides users who wish to issue a limited number of claims to commence and manage County Court proceedings using a website, and to pay court fees online using a credit card. Fees for all of these cases can be paid in a lump sum, previously files could be submitted on floppy disk or magnetic tape. For this reason long-standing users of the CCBC may still refer to the file as the tape. In 2012 a secure email transfer system was implemented as an interim measure until the new SDT system was completed, once this was done the secure email transfer option was removed. CCBC users may poll the SDT API to request updates on the status of their cases, as well as issuing claim forms, the CCBC also handles requests for judgments and warrants of execution in the same manner. Claim forms issued by the CCBC are served upon the defendant in the manner as other courts. However, the pack also includes a password to allow the defendant to file their response via a website. Where the defendant contests some, or all, of the claim, Rule 7 allows for limits to be placed on the types of claim that may be issued via the CCBC. In addition the CCBC cannot be used to issue claims under Part 8 of the CPR, Northampton Bulk Centre Money Claim Online Civil Procedure Rules 1998 online
32.
Judiciary of England and Wales
–
There are various levels of judiciary in England and Wales — different types of courts have different styles of judges. At 31 March 2006 there were 1,825 judges in post in England and Wales, some judges with United Kingdom-wide jurisdiction also sit in England and Wales, particularly Justices of the United Kingdom Supreme Court and members of the tribunals judiciary. By statute, judges are guaranteed continuing judicial independence, the following is a list of the various types of judges who sit in the Courts of England and Wales, Since 3 April 2006, the Lord Chief Justice has been the overall head of the judiciary. Previously he was second to the Lord Chancellor, but that office lost its functions under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The Lord Chief Justice is also the head of the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal and he was also President of the Queens Bench Division of the High Court, but on becoming head of the judiciary that responsibility was transferred to a new office. Although the Lord Chancellor is no longer a judge, he still exercises disciplinary authority over the judges and he also has a role in appointing judges. In law reports, the Lord Chief Justice is referred to as Smith LCJ or Lord Smith CJ, and the Lord Chancellor as Smith C. In court, the Lord Chief Justice wears a black gown with gold lace along with a short wig during criminal cases. Ceremonially, the Lord Chief Justice wears the red robe with white trim along with a gold chain, the Master of the Rolls is head of the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal. The other Heads are in charge of the three divisions of the High Court, the Chancellor of the High Court is President of the Chancery Division of the High Court. Until 2006 this role was held by the Lord Chancellor. The Vice-Chancellor was renamed Chancellor of the High Court when the Lord Chancellors judicial role was abolished, the Heads of Division are referred to in law reports as Smith MR, Smith P, Smith P, and Smith C respectively. Vice-Chancellors from pre-2006 Chancery cases were referred to as Smith VC, in court, the Heads of Division wear a black damask gown with gold lace along with a short wig during criminal cases and the black civil gown with gold tabs during civil cases. Ceremonially, the Heads of Division wear red gowns with white trim along with full wigs except for the Master of the Rolls who wears the black gown with gold lace. Judges of the Court of Appeal are known as Lords Justices, before swearing in they may be addressed as The Honourable Lord Justice Smith, and after swearing in as the Right Honourable Lord Justice Smith. Female Lord Justices are known as Lady Justices, addressed as My Lord or My Lady. In law reports, referred to as Smith LJ, and, for more than one judge, Smith, formerly, Lords Justices of Appeal could only be drawn from barristers of at least 10 years standing. The Lord Justices wear black gowns and court coats and short wigs during criminal cases
.svg)
