Making New Law

(...) Finally, the Bill goes to the reigning monarch for the Royal Assent. All Bills must pass through both houses before being sent for signature by the Queen, when they become Acts of Parliament and the Law of the Land.

(...) Nowadays the Royal Assent is merely a formality. In theory, the Queen can stili refuse to sign the Bill, but she always signs them.

(...) The Bill then goes to one of the Houses for the report stage, when it can be amended. If passed after its third reading, it goes to the other house. Amendments made to a Bill by the House of Lords must be considered by the Commons. In case the House of Commons does not agree, the Bill is altered and sent back to the Lords for reconsideration. If disagreement between the two Houses persists, the Commons prevails. The House of Lords has no power to deal with money Bills, but it can table them.

(...) New legislation in Britain usually starts in the House of Commons which plays the major role in law-making. However, the House of Lords also has the power to initiate legislation. In each House a Bill is considered in three stages, called readings. The first reading is purely formal, to introduce the bill. The second reading is usually the occasion for debate. After the second reading the bill is examined in detail by a committee.

Task 5. Answer the questions given below.

1. Where does new legislation in Britain usually start?

2. How many readings does a Bill pass through?

3. What is each reading characterised by?

4. What is done with the Bill if there is disagreement between the two Houses?

5. What is the final stage of the Bill?

6. Does the Queen often refuse to sign the Bill?

Unit 5. Courts and Law

Task 1.Read the text and point out the main features of the historical development of the British legal system.

Appealing to History...

Different countries develop their own form of dispute resolution, which is more fit for their culture and historical background. Prior to the Norman Conquest, there was no system of law which was common to England. Justice was administered locally. There was no English law as such. Rather, there was a variety of different regional systems. During the reign of Henry II, judges were sent to the provinces where they could become familiar with local customs and could use their knowledge to develop a single law that was common to the entire country. Thus the system of courts and common law developed at Westminster and around the country by means of itinerant judges. That was a single system of law for the whole country: common law. This approach established the importance of judicial decisions as a source of law, though it was not truly formalised until the establishment of a reliable system of case reporting in 1865.

The doctrine of precedent was based on the principles of stare decisis, obiter dicta and ratio decidendi according to which a later court is to be bound to apply the same reasoning as an earlier court where the two cases raise substantially the same questions of principle. The binding nature of the doctrine of precedent created a foundation of certainty. However, apart from certainty the law needs some flexibility.

By the 14^th century, the common law had ceased to be flexible and failed to meet the demands of the new cases. More and more litigants who could not obtain redress from the common law would petition the King. Eventually, it was the Lord-Chancellor rather than the King who heard petitions. As the number of such petitions grew, the Court of Chancery was established and equity developed as a system of justice distinct from the common law. Equity introduced a number of remedies unknown in the common law. This quite frequently allowed to seek such a remedy when all the common law remedies had been exhausted. At the same time equity was never a rival of the common law. It simply provided additional "alternative" ways of achieving justice.

For example, the common law relied on a single remedy: damages. However, this remedy was often found to be inadequate or inappropriate. Equity was able to develop a range of alternative, discretionary remedies.

For centuries, the systems of law and equity were administered separately. The creation of a single organised system of courts in England dates back to 1873-1875 when the Judicature Act brought the two systems together so that all courts could grant both legal and equitable remedies. It should be noted that this was a procedural fusion of common law and equity, i.e. from that point all courts had both common law and equitable jurisdiction. As far as substantive law is concerned, the two systems remain distinct. It was established that where there was a conflict between the two systems Equity should prevail.

Task 2. Check your understanding of the text by giving answers to the following questions.

1. Was there a law system in England before the Norman Conquest?

2. By what time had the system of common law been truly formalised?

3. What was the advantage of the common law system of justice?

4. What was its chief disadvantage?

5. How did the law of equity appear in England?

6. When was a single organised system of courts created in the country?

Task 3. Render the following text into English paying special attention to the expressions in bold type

Правовая система Англии и Уэльса относится к так называемой правовой семье общего права (англосаксонской системе). В отличие от стран романо-германской правовой семьи (континентальной системы) английское законодательство не кодифицировано и, как следствие этого, имеет менее систематизированный характер. В этих условиях в системе источников права Англии и Уэльса одно из ведущих мест наряду с законом (нормативно-правовым актом) традиционно занимает судебный прецедент - решение суда по конкретному делу, являющееся обязательным для нижестоящих судов при последующем рассмотрении аналогичных дел. В настоящее время вышеуказанное различие между англосаксонской и континентальной системами начинает постепенно стираться.

В правовой системе Англии и Уэльса на протяжении столетий сосуществуют общее право и право справедливости.

Общее право было создано разъездными королевскими судьями, которые ездили по стране и решали самые разные дела. Первоначально дела рассматривались ими по собственному усмотрению с учетом местных обычаев, но затем, накапливая опыт и обмениваясь им, судьи выработали общие принципы для единообразного рассмотрения дел на всей территории государства.

Однако сформировавшееся за счет деятельности разъездных судей общее право не обладало необходимой гибкостью и не всегда позволяло вынести истинно верное решение. В результате постепенно формируется другая система права и отправления правосудия. Если суды общего права при вынесении решений были связаны жесткими, формализованными рамками, то суд лорда-канцлера решал дела, руководствуясь принципами гуманности и справедливости. Поэтому новая альтернативная система права и отправления правосудия стала называться правом справедливости.

В результате судебной реформы 1873-1875 гг. обе системы – общего права и права справедливости – были объединены в единую систему, в рамках которой они продолжают сосуществовать и поныне, при этом в случае противоречия между двумя системами приоритет имеет право справедливости.

Task 4. Read the text and compare the functioning of the legal systems in Great Britain and Russia.