You are allowed ten minutes before the start of the examination to acquaint

yourself with the instructions below and to read the question paper.

Do not write anything until the invigilator informs you that you may start
the examination. You will be given five minutes at the end of the
examination to complete the front of any answer books used.

April/May 2008 LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001

Multiple Choice Answer Sheet

1 Answer Book

THE UNIVERSITY OF READING

EXAMINATION FOR THE INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION

PROGRAMME IN LAW

LAW 1
(LW0LAW)

Three hours

SECTION A Answer ALL the multiple choice questions in Section A on the

ANSWER SHEET provided, by crossing through one of (a) or (b) or (c) or (d).
This section is worth 20 marks

SECTION B consists of essay questions. Answer TWO questions. Each

question is worth 20 marks.

SECTION C consists of two questions on source materials. Answer ONE

question. Each question is worth 40 marks. Answer all parts of your chosen
question.
 Page 2

SECTION A – Multiple Choice

Choose the most appropriate answer to ALL the following questions. Each
question is worth 1 mark.

1-1 The doctrine of stare decisis means:-

(a) in a conflict between equity and the common law, equity prevails.
(b) anything a judge says throughout the case is a useful source of law.
(c) a judge must apply the literal meaning of words in a statute.
(d) a judge must follow binding precedent.

1-2 In a Court of Appeal hearing, which of the following is NOT an example

of a persuasive precedent:-
(a) a dissenting judgment made by a judge in the House of Lord’s.
(b) a judgment made by a High Court judge.
(c) a majority decision made by the Law Lords.
(d) a decision made by a senior court in Canada.

1-3 A "court of first instance" means:-

(a) the original trial court.
(b) the County Court.
(c) the Court of Appeal.
(d) the Magistrates Court.

1-4 The Practice Statement 1966:-

(a) effectively forbids judicial law making.
(b) effectively allows all judges to make new law.
(c) effectively allows the House of Lords judges to overrule their
previous decisions.
(d) effectively allows the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) to
depart from precedent when necessary.

LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001

 Page 3

1-5 The case of Pepper v Hart 1993 is an important case because:-

(a) it restricted the right of the Court of Appeal from making new law.
(b) it was the first civil case where the House of Lords exercised their
rights under the Practice Statement 1966.
(c) it allowed the use of Hansard in statutory interpretation.
(d) it set out the rules of statutory interpretation for the Court of
Appeal.

1-6 The cases of R v Taylor, R v Gould and R v Spencer:-

(a) say that the Court of Appeal (civil division) may overrule a
precedent made per incuriam.
(b) decided that the Courts of Appeal do not have the right to depart
from their previous decisions.
(c) give authority to Court of Appeal judges in criminal cases to depart
from precedent if it is in the interests of justice to the appellant.
(d) are examples of decisions using the Practice Statement 1966.

1-7 Case precedent has been criticized because it has "retrospective effect".
This means:-
(a) the new decisions create uncertainty in the law.
(b) the decision finds a defendant guilty of an act that was not a crime
when he committed it , as in R v R.
(c) case law is too rigid.
(d) it gives judges too much power.

1-8 Which of the following is NOT an example of a Bill:-

(a) a Private Members Bill.
(b) a Private Bill.
(c) a Public Members Bill.
(d) a Public Bill.

1-9 The most detailed examination of a Bill takes place at:-

(a) the First Reading.
(b) the Second Reading.
(c) Royal Assent.
(d) Report Stage.

1-10 The Woolf Reforms led to the passing of:-

(a) the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.
LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001 Turn Over
 Page 4
(b) the Access to Justice Act 1999.
(c) The Courts and Legal Services Act 1990.
(d) the Human Rights Act 1999.

1-11 Which of these is NOT a principle for democratic law-making:-

(a) statutes should be as certain and intelligible as possible.
(b) statutes should be rooted in the authority of Parliament.
(c) citizens should be involved as fully as possible in the legislative
process.
(d) statutes are made for the benefit of Government.

1-12 Which of the following is NOT an example of delegated legislation:-

(a) bylaws.
(b) statutory instruments.
(c) judicial review.
(d) orders in council.

1-13 The main decision-making body of the European Union is:-

(a) the Commission.
(b) the Council of Ministers.
(c) the European Assembly.
(d) the Economic and Social Committee.

1-14 The Treaty of Rome 1957 is important because:-

(a) it established the foundations of the European Union.
(b) it was the Treaty allowing Great Britain to join the EU.
(c) it established a Court of Human Rights.
(d) it extended the European Union to 25 member states.

1-15 The Law Commission is:

(a) the main law reform body.
(b) a committee scrutinizing the process of delegated legislation.
(c) the body that selects magistrates.
(d) the body that trains judges.

LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001

 Page 5

1-16 A "pre-action protocol" is:-

(a) a new system of disclosing information to the other party to try to
settle the case without going to trial.
(b) the filing the claim form at the County Court.
(c) the swearing in of the jury.
(d) when the barristers shake hands before starting the trial.

1-17 Which of the following cases CANNOT be heard in a Magistrates

Court:-
(a) a trial for a summary offence.
(b) a trial for a crime committed by an eleven year old.
(c) a contested divorce case.
(d) a claim for maintenance payments to support a child.

1-18 Which of the following are NOT allowed to sit on a jury:-

(a) Fred, 69 years old, who has been living in England for six years.
(b) John, a High Court judge.
(c) Mary, a magistrate.
(d) Bill, who is on bail awaiting trial.

1-19 A solicitor who operates a "conditional fee system", means:-

(a) if he loses the case, the client does not pay his fees.
(b) if he loses the case his client pays nothing.
(c) he will take the case on the condition that his client takes out
insurance.
(d) his fee is decided by the trial judge.

1-20 The case Sirros v Moore is important because:-

(a) it protects judges from being sued for judicial negligence.
(b) it overrules a case precedent that gave advocates immunity from
suit.
(c) it is the first case of judicial review.
(d) it is a case allowing solicitors to become Law Lords.

LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001 Turn Over

 Page 6

SECTION B

Answer TWO of the following cases. Each question is worth a maximum of 20

marks.

2. Critically assess the aims and objectives of the European Union and its
effect on the English Legal System.

3. Explain the concept of separation of powers with particular emphasis on

the role of the judiciary.

4. Explore the role that equity has played and continues to play in the
English legal system.

5. Explain the strengths and weakness of the civil court system.

6. Consider the balance between the powers of the police, and the
protections given to a suspect.

7. Evaluate the role of the jury in the justice system.

8. Examine the ways in which judges and magistrates may deal with the
convicted criminal and how they arrive at their decision.

9. Consider the role played by the magistrate in the English Legal System.

LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001

 Page 7

SECTION C

Answer ONE of the following cases on SOURCES OF LAW. Each answer is

worth 40 marks.

Cite relevant cases.

10. Judicial Precedent

SOURCE

While there are complex rules regarding when courts can avoid following
their own past precedent, one aspect of the doctrine of precedent is quite
simple. A court in England or Wales is strictly bound to follow the
decision of a court equal to or higher than it in the hierarchy of the courts,
subject to defined exceptions.

In the important case of R v Holley (205) the Privy Council, hearing an

appeal from the Court of Appeal in Jersey, decided that the House of
Lords was wrong in R v Smith (Morgan James) (2000). Smith has been
unpopular with both judges and academics. However, as we already
know, Holley, is at best, persuasive precedent. In fact, the Privy Council
had already decided in previous cases, that where a case before it was in
effect bound by English, then it should follow it. On this basis, the result
of Holley should have been clear; the Privy Council should have followed
Smith.

In a more recent case, R v James and Karimi (2006), the Court of Appeal
(Criminal Division) had to consider whether to apply Smith, or whether it
had, in fact, been overruled by the Privy Council decision in Holley. The
Court of Appeal chose the latter view and held that, in exceptional
circumstances, a decision of the Privy Council can take precedence over a
decision in the House of Lords. What the Court of Appeal did in James
and Karimi was, in effect, to overrule the precedent of the higher court.

LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001 Turn Over

 Page 8

Answer ALL parts.

(a) The source refers to "persuasive precedent". Explain what this

means and give different examples of when a precedent may be
persuasive.
[7 marks]

(b) Consider each of the following situations and explain how the
doctrine of precedent may apply:-

(i) A case comes before the Court of Appeal (Civil Division).

There are two past conflicting precedents – one from a
Court of Appeal decision in 2004 and one from the House
of Lords in 1999.
[5 marks]

(ii) A case comes before the House of Lords in June 2008.

There is a previous House of Lords decision on the same
issue made in January 2008, which the Law Lords now
consider to be out of date.
[5 marks]

(iii) In June 2008, the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) have

a case where the facts are quite similar to a decision the
same Court decided the previous year. The judges wish to
make a different decision from that made the previous year.
[5 marks]

(c) The source describes how the lower courts can avoid past decision
of higher courts in exceptional cases. Using the source and other
cases, explain how the Court of Appeal and the courts below it may
avoid following precedent.
[12 marks]

(d) Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of allowing the Court of

Appeal the same powers to change the law as the House of Lords.
[6 marks]

[Total 40 marks]

LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001

 Page 9

11. Statutory Interpretation

SOURCE

The claimant had been demonstrating in Parliament Square since June

2001. The view of the claimant was that the language of the Serious
Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 clear and unambiguous. It
provided that any person who organized, took part in or carried on a
demonstration was guilty of an offence if "when the demonstration starts"
authorization had not been given. He argued that the Act applied only to
demonstrations which started after the Act came into force and did not
apply to him because his demonstration had started before that date.

It was argued by the defendant that the statutory purpose of the Act was
to regulate all demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament and that no
rational basis had been suggested as to why Parliament should have
intended entirely to exclude demonstrations which had begun before the
Act came into force.

The judges held that the purpose (purposive approach) of the Act was
important. The words need not be interpreted literally. Their Lordships
concluded that the Parliamentary intention was clear. It was to regulate
all demonstrations within the designated area, whenever they began. It
appeared to their Lordships that when the Act was construed in its
context, and having regard to the plain intention of Parliament, it included
demonstrations actually starting before the Act came into force. Those
starting before, like the claimant's were held to have started when the Act
came into force; and in such cases the words "when the demonstration
starts" referred to that time.

Answer ALL parts.

(a) The source refers to the "purpose of the Act". Using the source and
other cases, explain how the purposive approach differs from the
literal rule and golden rule.
[10 marks]

(b) In the following situations, use the source and your knowledge of
the rules of statutory interpretation to decide whether or not the
LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001 Turn Over
 Page 10

defendant would be guilty or not guilty under the Serious and

Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 as any person who
organized, took part in or carried on a demonstration if, "when the
demonstration starts", authorization had not been given under the
Act.

(i) Mary has organized an anti-war demonstration in January

2008 close to Parliament. She did not seek authorization
and was arrested during the demonstration.
[5 marks]

(ii) Sam is going to a music concert in January 2008, at a hall

close to Parliament. He notices a group of people walking
in the direction of the concert and joins them. The group
are in fact anti-fur trade campaigners involved in an
unauthorized demonstration.
[5 marks]

(iii) Steve has held regular demonstrations against animal

cruelty for 20 years close to Parliament. He believes the
Act does not apply to him as he started his demonstration
before the Act came into force.
[5 marks]

(c) Using the Source and other examples, explain the intrinsic and
extrinsic aids available to judges when attempting to interpret an
Act of Parliament.
[15 marks]

[Total 40 marks]

[End of Question Paper]

LW0LAW 2007/8 A 001