GCSE Law Unit 2

1. based on Lord Woolf's "access to justice"

   Annotations:

   • Access to Justice redesigned the civil courts process, in an attempt to streamline a log-jammed system. It has had mixed results 
   1. key features

      Annotations:

      • Pre action protocols - Parties must try and resolve before taking to court         3 track system Strict time limits for all parties Cases managed and pushed forward by judges ADR is encouraged 
   2. evaluation of Lord Woolf's reforms
      1. positives

         Annotations:

         • promoting ADR should improve outcomes Case management of claims should speed up and allow the courts to run more smoothly pre-action protocols should mean fewer cases come to court 
      2. negatives

         Annotations:

         • Low take up of ADR in spite of encouragement Courts still jammed up with cases.    
2. To start a case - Form N1

   Annotations:

   • court will allocate it to a 'track'
   1. the 3 tracks
      1. Small claims
         1. 0-10k
            1. county court
               1. one day
               2. judges chambers

                  Annotations:

                  • not a trial in a court room, but parties sitting in an office with a judge
               3. district judge
               4. no legal fees claimable

                  Annotations:

                  • so most people represent themselves
            2. 0-1k if injury involved
      2. fast-track
         1. 10-25k
            1. County Court
               1. District Judge
               2. 30 weeks

                  Annotations:

                  • judge will case manage and set a timetable for evidence etc
               3. formal court hearing
               4. can use lawyers

                  Annotations:

                  • legal fees can be recovered from the losing party
      3. Multi-track
         1. complex and high value £25k +
            1. High Court
               1. Circuit Judge
               2. 72 weeks
               3. lawyers used
               4. formal court hearings
   2. Defendant

      Annotations:

      • Defendant gets a copy of the claim form - they can Defend (deny the claim) Admit (and settlement will be arranged) Counter-claim (they will ask the court to consider compensation for them) 

Annotations:

• disputes between private individuals/companies

1. claimant v defendant
   1. burden of proof - balance of probabilties
   2. aim to compensate the claimant

1. County court
2. High Court
   1. QBD

      Annotations:

      • high value negligence claims civil debt Admiralty court 
   2. Chancery

      Annotations:

      • wills (probate) mortgages intellectual property (patents and trademarks) tax 
   3. Family

      Annotations:

      • divorce adoption care proceedings 
3. Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
4. Supreme Court

1. appeal to next senior judge

   Annotations:

   • appeals against decision of a district judge go to circuit judge. Then High court, then Court of appeal then Supreme Court.   
   1. leap frog appeal

      Annotations:

      • on important points of law which need a fresh decision from the supreme court, appeals can 'skip' the Court of Appeal. 

1. adv

   Annotations:

   • certainty - legally binding enforcable decision Time managed tracks keep cases under control. satisfaction of a court victory
2. disadv

   Annotations:

   • costly/expensive time consuming Publicity delays

Annotations:

• courts are expensive, time consuming and destroy relationships.

1. Negotiation
   1. the parties sort it out

      Annotations:

      • no 3rd party involvement claimant and defendant resolve the problem, come to compromise settle out of court 
2. mediation
   1. 3rd party helps discussion

      Annotations:

      • another person helps each side get their views across.  keeps things moving forwards prevents personal antagonism from getting in the way of a solution 
3. arbitration
   1. third party makes a legally binding decision
      1. C and D agree to abide by decision
      2. can be a hearing or on paper
      3. parties can agree up front

         Annotations:

         • even before any dispute has arisen, parties can agree in their contracts that they will avoid court and use arbitration
         1. Scott v Avery Clause
      4. example
         1. ABTA

            Annotations:

            • the Association of British Travel Agents will settle disputes between travellers and tour companies
4. conciliation
   1. trained third party helps solve

      Annotations:

      • other person helps advise on possible solutions they will have some training in the area in dispute 
      1. eg. ACAS
5. for some limited areas of law
   1. tribunals
      1. more like formal court

         Annotations:

         • but attempts to be less intimidating
         1. panel of three make decision
            1. legally binding
            2. one legally trained

               Annotations:

               • others will have some expertise in the area being considered.  EG if employment tribunal one may be from industry and one from a union 
         2. limited legal funding
         3. tribunals have own appeals system
         4. advantages

            Annotations:

            • less intimidating than court   expertise on the panel  lower legal costs   fewer delays than court  
         5. disadvantages

            Annotations:

            • still long delays can be stressful Limited legal assistance available ( not all fees reclaimable) public hearings   
   2. eg

      Annotations:

      • housing immigration employment 
6. evaluation of ADR
   1. adv

      Annotations:

      • cheaper than court faster than court more positive outcomes - helps preserve business or family relationships
   2. disadv

      Annotations:

      • hard to arrange Limited uptake- people prefer to deal within the courts not always legally binding so may end up in court at a later date anyway

Annotations:

• rich people may fund their own legal expenses, Even for straightforward cases this may be many thousands of pounds

Annotations:

• tax-payer funded money 

1. Community Legal Service funding
   1. means test

      Annotations:

      • you will only get legal aid if you have no money to pay for it yourself.  This includes income and 'capital' - money in the bank 
   2. merits test

      Annotations:

      • you will only get legal aid if you are likely to win
   3. evaluation

      Annotations:

      • good because it means that poor people can access justice Aims to conserve public funds ______________ negative because the merits test means that some cases cannot be tested in court also bad because very limited types of claims now can get legal aid. 
   4. restricted to very few types of case

      Annotations:

      • most family lawexcluded from legal aid

1. lawyer gives their time for free

   Annotations:

   • often this relates to charitable work

1. "no-win-no-fee"
   1. claimant takes out insurance against losing so lawyer gets paid

      Annotations:

      • After the Event Insurance.
   2. if claimant wins the lawyers get their fees from the losing side
   3. most often used in negligence Claims

      Annotations:

      • road accidents and injuries
   4. evaluation

      Annotations:

      • plus - gives people with no money access to compensation No expense to tax-payer Negatives - extra insurance will push up overall costs of the process Lawyers only accept 'easy' cases

Annotations:

• motor and household policies often have an element of legal cover   

1. role

   Annotations:

   • 'advocate' in court self employed Work in groups called 'chambers'  they represent people in court, act as their voice.  role is to present the best legal argument possible for their client
2. training and qualification

   Annotations:

   • law degree (or other degree plus one year GDL conversion) BVC - bar vocational course - one year Pupillage - on the job training - one year
   1. have to join an Inn

      Annotations:

      • trainee barristers have to join an Inn of Court and attend training and get 'dining credits' for attending dinners
3. smallest prof
4. The Bar Council

   Annotations:

   • governing body

1. role

   Annotations:

   • give general advice to clients on wide areas of law Work in law firms - employed may take extra qualifications to speak in higher courts "right of audience"
2. training and qualification

   Annotations:

   • law degree (or other plus GDL conversion) One year Law Practice Course (LPC) THEN 2 years 'articles' - on the job training before becoming a fully qualified solicitor
3. largest prof
4. The Law Society

   Annotations:

   • governing body

1. role

   Annotations:

   • similar to solicitors but tend to have a narrow area of specialism
2. training and qualification

   Annotations:

   • vocational qualification while working in a law firm no degree needed
3. ILEX

   Annotations:

   • Institute of Legal Executives Governing body 

Annotations:

• do we need separate roles for barristers and solicitors?  One lawyer would be more straightforward for clients. BUT might reduce specialism that exists 

Annotations:

• District Judge Recorder  Circuit Judge High court judge Appeal Court Judge Supreme Court Justice

Annotations:

• must have served as a lawyer with rights of audience for 7 years (usually barristers)  

Annotations:

• appointed by the lord Chancellor and the Queen Judicial appointments committee runs interviews and seletion process

Annotations:

• pale male and stale White old men   few women in senior courts Low representation of ethnic minorities Most judges over 50 and senior judges in their 60s Majority went to expensive private schools

1. pale male and stale

Annotations:

• quite limited in training will be trained in key changes of the law May receive training on diversity issues.  Otherwise they learn by shadowing experienced judges 

Attachments:

• Basic freedoms and Human Rights