The Hierarchical Structure of the Court System in England and Wales - Assignment Example

? THE HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURE OF THE COURT SYSTEM IN ENGLAND AND WALES AND THE DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT Introduction Every country is governed by a system of tools among which the legal framework forms a basic requirement. Moreover, there are various court systems across the globe with diversity notable with structures, type of law applied, systems of appeal and referrals among other feature. Besides, adoption of common systems of justice by different countries is a common feature as presented within this case study. England and Wales share common structures in the legal structure and the structure is commonly called the English legal system. Besides the hierarchical structure that defines the court system, the supplication of the various statutes distinguishes the system from other global structures of court systems. The English court system stands unique in the manner of application of the various doctrines of law and observes a characteristic doctrine of precedent. This paper therefore has the main objective of critically assessing the hierarchical structure that is observed within the England as well as Wales court systems. Besides, the paper intends to evaluate the extent to which the doctrine of common law in binding precedent takes effect or is observed within this structure of court system. The report will prioritize the analysis of the main courts in the hierarchy and assess the individual status and functioning concerning the common system with the analysis taking special attention on the civil courts as against the English criminal courts. Discussion Dating back from the ancient times of Alfred the Great, the English system of law has had great revolutions to stand as it is today. Constant improvements and reformations have been observed which have in one way or another contributed to the making of the English legal system as it is today. It is comprised of various courts in a supreme structure, which is wholly depended upon for justice system within England and Wales. It is however paramount to understand that the entire system of justice has two distinct frameworks as defined by the separate application of criminal law and civil law. However, as earlier noted, this paper specializes on the civil court systems as they are in England and Wales. The English civil system of courts comprises of various courts which include the ‘county courts’, the ‘magistrate courts’, the ‘high courts’ the ‘court of appeal’, ‘House of lords’ as well as the ‘high court” (The English Legal System – Overview, nd, para 1-3). The courts follow a hierarchical order where varying powers and provisions are created and enforced by the different levels of the courts. The lowest ranked court in the civil system is the county court, which has primary jurisdiction on debt collection as well as in civil action. The courts often present the most efficient system to deal with such cases, which are often many and it, is preferred for the benefit of cost effectiveness, which the public exchequer as well as the parties to litigation enjoys. The magistrate’s courts in England and Wales have special jurisdictions on family matters where custody orders in relation to children and or matrimonial grievances are addressed. Moreover, this level of court system is mandated to address the issues of adoption cases and have the potential of excluding a person from a family or household. The high court, through the family division is charged with the responsibility of addressing appeal cases from this court. Being both an original as well as an appellate court, the high court provides an opportunity where individuals would start judicial proceedings direct from here and where appeals are made on particular issues as specified. The high court has different divisions which are distinct in regard to roles assigned. There exists no jurisdiction to limit the working of the court and thus it serves the entire England as well as Wales. Besides addressing the civil cases alone, Queens Division also, address the contract as well as tort cases. Besides, most of commercial cases are also handled within this division. Chancery division on the other hand is responsible for matters on companies, trusts, insolvency, land, copyrights and patenting and has a specialized unit dealing with cases of mentally ill persons. Family division within the court addresses matrimonial issues, validates or invalidates marriages and attends to such matters as appealed from the magistrate or county courts. On the case of the court of appeal within England and Wales, the defining feature is the particular bench of judges who serve here and are referred to as ‘Lords justices of appeal’ besides the unofficial judges who sit within the panel on condition of office held. Basic function of the court division is to address the appeals from all other lower courts within the land. The house of lords represents the highest organ which besides addressing all appeals from the high court and court of appeal addresses cases for foreign cases such as Scottish courts, courts of Northern Irish as well as other commonwealth courts. Other systems of courts within England and Wales are the tribunals as well as the ‘European court of justice’, which are all specialized systems of justice and are not appellate in nature (“An introduction to the English legal system” nd, para 1-9). Doctrine of precedence It is worth noting that common law develops from case laws and as such depends on the various cases attended to daily within the courts. The common practice in imposing judgments by the judges is through review of previous cases and applying them to foregoing situations. Nevertheless, many principles in application have their roots from the customary ancient laws as well as from Roman law. This affirms the common notion that judges do not make new laws but on the contrary only declares available ones applicable within the particular frameworks being attended to. Through efficient storage and reporting of these laws, litigants are assumed to be in a position to rightly predict likely outcomes to their cases. Judges rarely judges identical cases and as such, judgments are almost decisive on other subsequent cases alike. In fact, it is said that there has never been identical cases but principle of precedence dictates that laws applied in previous cases keep on being applied within new contexts and to meet new situations. It is the function of governments to make law through the legislative arm and not the role of judges. Stare Decisis presents the fundamental principle on which the doctrine on precedence is based. It postulates that any past decision by a higher court keeps binding any succeeding case within the lower courts. This explains the interaction between the principle of precedence as applied within England and Wales where the judicial system is hierarchical. The lowest court (county courts) therefore wholly relies on the previous case decisions by the higher ranking courts for judgments while the house of Lords is by no means held responsible to any other court due to its rank. According to the doctrine, any decision by a higher court becomes binding to all other courts of lower hierarchy within the system. It has an implication that whenever a judge is in the process of passing a judgment, it is compulsory that he/she evaluates whether any such related case had been dealt with previously within the particular court or within higher courts within the hierarchy. The effect is therefore for the judge to consider the past judgment before deciding on the current one and if an equal court or a higher one handled the case, then the judgment is binding within the current case. This reaffirms the necessity of proper sharing of information and storage of the same for ease of comparison and precedence in making judgments within the hierarchy. The doctrine is only meaningful with the understanding that all courts within the hierarchy are definite in relation to the rest and without one, and then the hierarchy would be meaningless (Vong, nd, p. 318-321). Conclusion In conclusion, therefore, the English legal system has been shown to be dependent on a predefined hierarchy, which links courts of different levels with others within the system. The judicial system within the countries has special regard with common law and judges have no power to design laws. The power of making laws rests on the government through the legislature but judges are mandated to provide interpretation of the same. The structure (hierarchy) defines the distinction between the responsibilities handled at the different levels. Specific features are used to define the levels with lower level courts such as the county as well as the magistrate courts wholly depending on higher-level courts in decision-making. The ranking of the courts also defines the order of application of appeals to judicial judgments with the House of Lords (Supreme Court) having no higher court besides it. This hierarchy of courts within England and Wales is a fundamental necessity for application of the doctrine of precedence. Higher courts’ decisions must be binding to lower ranking courts and this implies that every court must consult same level courts or courts higher in rank on such past cases handled before passing a judgment. This therefore justifies that the precedence doctrine is wholly dependent on the hierarchical structure of the courts systems within England and Wales. Bibliography “An introduction to the English legal system” nd. The court system. Available at: < http://static.luiss.it/erasmuslaw/uk/Ingh1.html#z7> (Accessed on 5 November 2013) “The English Legal System – Overview”, nd. Law in England and Wales. Available at: < http://www.lawobserver.co.uk/legal_system_20.html> (Accessed on 5 November 2013) Vong D., nd. Binding precedent and English judicial law-making. Available at: < https://www.law.kuleuven.be/jura/art/21n3/vong.pdf> (Accessed on 5 November 2013) Read More