Farewell to the Traditional System of Justice or Just a New Supreme Court?

One of the most significant changes in the judicial system of England and Wales is the introduction of a brand new institution, which will be totally different from all the bodies existing within the system so far – the new Supreme Court.

The new Supreme Court is supposed to put the relationship between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary on a modern footing respecting the separation of powers between the three. The functions of the highest courts in the land are currently divided between the House of Lords (the Appellate Committee) and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The Appellate Committee of the House of Lords receives appeals from the courts in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, and in civil cases from Scotland. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, in addition to its overseas and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, considers questions as to whether the devolved administrations, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly are acting within their legal powers. The Human Rights Act 1998 which made the European Convention on Human Rights a part of English domestic law makes stricter requirements to ensuring independence and impartiality of the judicial system. It raises questions about whether there is sufficient independence from the executive and the legislature when the highest court of appeal is situated within one of the chambers of Parliament. The Government believes that the creation of a separate Supreme Court will be an important part of the reforms which will rearrange the relationship between the Judiciary, the Government and Parliament to preserve and increase independence of English judges.

The idea of the reform of the highest court in the land is about abolishing the jurisdiction of the House of Lords within the UK's judicial system and vesting the functions currently performed by the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords in a new Supreme Court which will by no means be connected to Parliament. It should be understood that this will not be a Supreme Court based on the US model with the power to strike down and annul legislation and assert the primacy of the constitution. Nor will it be a constitutional court based on the German model or a court which would give definitive rulings on difficult points of law the way the European Court of Justice does. A Supreme Court along one of such models would be a departure from the UK's constitutional traditions where Parliament is supreme. Regardless of the membership in the European Union and the Human Rights Act, this principle remains intact.

Task 7. Read the following text and give in short the information about the system of courts in the USA.

What Is a Court?

A court is a tribunal established to administer justice under the law. It may decide civil disputes or criminal cases. A court may award damages or administer punishment for crimes.

Courts vary in authority (or jurisdiction) from justice of the peace and small claims courts to the supreme courts of various states and the Supreme Court of the United States. State courts have the power to decide cases involving state and local laws. Federal courts have the power to decide cases involving federal law.

There are two different levels of courts: trial courts and appellate courts. A trial court is the first court to hear a dispute. Witnesses testify and present information to prove the alleged facts. A trial court consists not only of a judge but also of lawyers, who are officers of the court, and others who are necessary for the court's operation. The words court and judge are often used to mean the same thing. While presiding over a legal action, the judge may be referred to as "The Court" or "Your Honor".

An appellate court sometimes reviews decisions of a trial court when a party claims an error of law was made at the trial level. In most cases, the decision may be appealed to the next higher court, including the state supreme court. The decision of the supreme court of a state may be reviewed by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Unlike trial courts, appellate courts do not hear witnesses or accept new evidence. They examine the transcript – the word-for-word written record of what was said at the trial. They also read appellate briefs (written arguments on the issues submitted by the opposing attorneys). Then the appellate courts listen to oral arguments of the attorneys and may question them about the case. Finally, the appellate courts decide whether, as a matter of law, the decision below should be affirmed (upheld), reversed (overturned), amended (changed), or remanded (sent back to the trial court for corrective action, including, possibly, a new trial).

Task 8. Answer the following questions:

1. What is the definition of a court?

2. What functions does a court fulfill?

3. What kinds of courts are found in the United States?

4. What are the two different levels of courts?

5. What is the main function of a trial court?

6. What is the main function of an appellate court?

7. Is new evidence accepted by appellate courts?

8. What is a transcript and what are appellate briefs?

9. What do appellate courts do?

10. What decisions are made by appellate courts?

Task 9. Read the text given below and find the answers to the following questions:

1. What title is the Lord Chief Justice to assume as part of the reform?

2. What courts is the title supposed to cover?

3. Will the scope of responsibilities change together with the changing of the titles?

4. What new titles are going to be introduced?

5. How will appointments be made?