The Law-Making Process Analysis
Need for Interpretation
In his The Law-Making Process, Michael Zander gives has stated the three reasons why statutory interpretation is necessary:
1. Intricacy of statutes with respect to the way of the subject, various artists and the mixture of legal and technical language can bring about incongruity, obscure and questionable language.
2. Anticipating the future occasion’s prompts the utilization of uncertain terms. Statutes are interpreted by the judges. Case of indeterminate dialect incorporate words, for example, "sensible". For this situation the courts are in charge of figuring out what constitutes "sensible".
3. “The multifaceted nature of language. Language, words and phrases are an imprecise form of communication. Words can …show more content…
In English law it is normally made by the decision of a higher court, for example, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, which assumed control over the legal elements of the House of Lords in 2009. “Binding precedent relies on the legal principle of stare decisis. A stare decisis means to stand by things decided. It ensures certainty and consistency in the application of law. Existing binding precedents from past cases are applied in principle to new situations by analogy.” There are three components required for a point of precedent to work. First one is that an effective arrangement of law reporting must be accepted by the courts. There must be some balance legal certainty which results into bindness effect of the previous decisions.
Circumstances which increase the authority of a precedent
1. The number of judges constituting the Bench and their distinction is a vital component in expanding the power of point of precedent.
2. More weight is carried by the unanimous decisions.
3. Affirmation, endorsement or taking after by different courts, particularly by a higher tribunal, adds to the quality of a point of precedent.
4. If an Act is passed typifying the law in a point of reference, the increases an additional power.
Theories of precedents
Declaratory
In his The Law-Making Process, Michael Zander gives has stated the three reasons why statutory interpretation is necessary:
1. Intricacy of statutes with respect to the way of the subject, various artists and the mixture of legal and technical language can bring about incongruity, obscure and questionable language.
2. Anticipating the future occasion’s prompts the utilization of uncertain terms. Statutes are interpreted by the judges. Case of indeterminate dialect incorporate words, for example, "sensible". For this situation the courts are in charge of figuring out what constitutes "sensible".
3. “The multifaceted nature of language. Language, words and phrases are an imprecise form of communication. Words can …show more content…
In English law it is normally made by the decision of a higher court, for example, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, which assumed control over the legal elements of the House of Lords in 2009. “Binding precedent relies on the legal principle of stare decisis. A stare decisis means to stand by things decided. It ensures certainty and consistency in the application of law. Existing binding precedents from past cases are applied in principle to new situations by analogy.” There are three components required for a point of precedent to work. First one is that an effective arrangement of law reporting must be accepted by the courts. There must be some balance legal certainty which results into bindness effect of the previous decisions.
Circumstances which increase the authority of a precedent
1. The number of judges constituting the Bench and their distinction is a vital component in expanding the power of point of precedent.
2. More weight is carried by the unanimous decisions.
3. Affirmation, endorsement or taking after by different courts, particularly by a higher tribunal, adds to the quality of a point of precedent.
4. If an Act is passed typifying the law in a point of reference, the increases an additional power.
Theories of precedents
Declaratory