{"id":375,"date":"2019-06-05T13:58:15","date_gmt":"2019-06-05T13:58:15","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2019-06-07T09:28:37","modified_gmt":"2019-06-07T09:28:37","slug":"impact-eu-uk-law-systems-3726","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/english-legal-system\/impact-eu-uk-law-systems-3726.php","title":{"rendered":"Impact of the European Union on UK Law Systems"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u2018Membership of the European Union and the Council of Europe has undermined the UK Constitution to such an extent that the UK Parliament is no longer sovereign. It will be good to return to the traditional means of overseeing the work of government.\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

Explain and analyse the statement above in the light of the current position under the UK Constitution.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Introduction:<\/strong><\/p>\n

This assignment is about the European Union<\/a> impacting the UK law system making<\/a> and to conclude whether it has weakened the UK judicial system or has enhanced it. It also explains the breakdown of the English Law system being subject to important external factors, in particular the law and institution of the European Union and Council of Europe [1]<\/a> and how the administrations and omissions are controlled. <\/p>\n

The English
\nJudicial System:<\/strong><\/p>\n

English law has a developing history, some elements of the
\nsystem which have been around for centuries have changed such as the monarchy.
\nThe lord’s gathering built up the regal courts, directed by proficient judges,
\nwhich slowly consumed the lawful forces of the baronial and clerical courts. By
\n1250 the regal judges had combined the different traditions into precedent-based
\nlaw, that is, law normal to the entire nation, also known as common law.
\nAnother framework known as equity created in the Court of Chancery, in which
\nthe Lord Chancellor considered petitions. <\/p>\n

UK constitution is not seen as codified but found in the form
\nof Case Laws, Acts of Parliament, Conventions and many more. The powers under
\nthis constitution are separated as legislative, executive and judiciary but the
\nmain principle is the sovereignty of Parliament according to Dicey, who claimed
\nthat Parliament is allowed to pass any act and make any law it wishes to. Our
\ngovernment works as an executive where the judiciary applies the laws legislated
\nby the Parliament, this sovereignty of the Parliament to make primary
\nlegislation is reaffirmed by the Human Rights Act 1998. <\/p>\n

One component of English law is the doctrine of judicial
\nprecedents, whereby the announced decisions of the courts originate laws for
\nfuture judgements. A judge is bound by judgements of courts of prevalent
\npurview yet not really by those of mediocre courts. Judicial precedents is very
\nwell valued as a power in the English legal system in order to provide
\njudgements and make case laws because the within the structural hierarchy of
\ncourts a decision of a higher court will be binding on courts lower than it in
\nthe hierarchy. [2]<\/a><\/p>\n

The ‘rule of law’ is one of the centre standards of the UK
\nConstitution, it is an unwritten teaching which is regularly used to allude to
\nthe major esteems of the constitution. Despite the fact that it is hard to
\ncharacterize, it is a key part in any constitution in any society. One example
\nof this is the case of Entick v Carrington, which is an original case in
\nEnglish law. Although externally concerning trespass, the choice for this
\nsituation was additionally to have significant protected ramifications for
\nprecedent based law purviews over the globe. It set up the rule that privilege
\nforces of the ruler and government are subordinate to the tradition that must
\nbe adhered to. It ensures that administration authorities acting in an official
\nlimit can’t practice open power unless such exercise of it is approved by some
\nparticular administer of law. Government authorities can’t enter private
\npremises without lawful expert.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

Delegated legislation is the law made by some person or by
\nsome body under the authority of an Act of Parliament, it can be overruled as
\nit doesn\u2019t come from the Parliament. But all the laws made should be compatible
\nto the European convention however, they cannot go against the European court
\nof Human rights which is one of the supreme courts in the UK. This shows that
\nthe UK is no more sovereign in controlling the laws itself, although the Human
\nRights Act 1998 does provide fair trial for the people in the UK and if any of
\nthe human rights are breached the case can be taken to the European court of
\njustice or the European court of Human rights and the UK law has to be considered
\nwhile making a decision; R v A (NO2 2002 1AC 45) in his judgment for this
\nsituation, Lord Steyn stated: “Regardless of the possibility that,
\ntranslated by the customary standards of understanding, the importance of the
\nenactment concedes to no uncertainty, segment 3 may in any case require the enactment
\nto be given an alternate significance. This House must read words into [the
\nlegislation] in order to make that segment consistent with a denounced\u2019s
\nentitlement to a reasonable trial under Article 6.”<\/p>\n

European convention signed in 1950, is a main element of the
\nHuman rights, guards our liberty, fair trial and privacy therefore the judges
\nhave to give effect to other laws in a way that is compatible with this
\nconvention otherwise it would be unlawful, shown in the case of Colozza v Italy
\n(An Appeal) where the right to fair trial was breached. A court or tribunal
\ndeciding an inquiry which has emerged regarding a Convention right should
\nconsider any judgment, choice, announcement or counselling sentiment of the European
\nCourt of Human Rights, together with some other decisions or assessments of the
\nCommission on Human Rights or the Ministers in the Council of Europe.<\/p>\n

The main source of the EU law is the treaties which can be
\ndefined as a formally concluded and ratified agreement between countries. On the off
\nchance that draft recommendations are endorsed by the European Parliament,
\nspeaking to EU natives, and the Council of Ministers speaking to part states
\nthen the proposition progress toward becoming law. The two most basic sorts of
\nEU laws are known as regulations and directives. Regulations have immediate and
\nprompt impact inside EU part states once they have been brought into impact at
\nEU level whereas Directives set out an EU objective, which singular nations
\nmust transpose into national enactment. EU summits are gone by presidents,
\nexecutives and chancellors who lead nations with altogether different lawful
\nframeworks, the EU can only guarantee that its individuals meet normal
\nprinciples of equity and majority rules system. The EU’s forces to make and
\nuphold laws have a direction on the UK’s sovereignty, Parliament can be said to
\nhave surrendered some of its sovereignty when it passed the European
\nCommunities Act 1972, empowering the UK to join what was then the European
\nEconomic Community as a result of the dualist system, toward the start of 1973,
\nand requiring courts in the UK to apply EU law. [4]<\/a><\/p>\n

Looking at the current situation of the UK, EU membership,
\nwhether full or incomplete, in case of a Brexit will likewise fundamentally
\nrequire some exchange offs on sovereignty as there are 14-17% of the UK law has
\ndriven from this membership. The UK government wants to replace the
\nHuman Rights Act with the British Bill of Rights and responsibilities, this
\nwould weaken our rights leaving politicians to decide when our fundamental
\nfreedoms should apply. Significantly, ECHR exists independently from foundations of
\nthe European Union, yet it has an essential effect on EU law judgements, for
\nexample, a current decision that detainees indicted lesser offenses ought to
\nhave the privilege to vote a choice that clashed with the will of Westminster. However
\nany choice to pull back from the Convention; a move the UK could influence now
\nto, is probably going to have a critically negative effect on the UK remaining
\nin Europe, the United Nations and the district’s ethical expert around the
\nglobe. <\/p>\n

The European Arrest Warrant enables British subjects to be
\nsent to another country and charged for wrongdoings in outside courts, regularly
\nfor minor offenses and Brexit would stop this. However, attackers, murders and
\ndifferent genuine crooks who convict offenses in Britain must be returned once
\nescaping abroad on account of the European Arrest Warrant and leaving would
\nstop justice. Also, numerous of Britain’s laws are made abroad by directs
\ngone down from Brussels and decisions maintained by the European Court of
\nJustice. UK courts must wind up plainly sovereign once more. Although, the
\nleave crusade has over-misrepresented what number of laws are dictated by the
\nEuropean Commission, it is smarter to shape vast laws from within instead of
\nleaving. The British Parliament is not sovereign anymore; with the EU dead set
\non closer union and further monetary joining likely after the euro emergency,
\nit is best to quit before ties develop. But in a globalized world, each nation
\nmust work nearer with others if the need to prosper financially and the desire
\nof an isolated England may undermine the UK. Leaving could advocate
\nanother connection among Britain and the EU, in light of facilitated commerce
\nand agreeable participation the EU, we would end the supremacy of European law,
\nand re-establish our sway and vote based system. [5]<\/a><\/p>\n

Public law isn’t at base about rights, despite the fact that
\nmisuse of power may and regularly do attack private rights; it is about wrongs,
\nthat is to state abuses of public power whereas Administrative Law is the law
\nidentifying with the control of government. Every single open specialist (aside
\nfrom Parliament itself) can have their exercises regulated by the courts, this
\nincorporates the Crown, government Ministers, nearby experts (Councils) and
\nother open bodies. The main role of Administrative Law is to keep the forces of
\nthe state inside its lawful cut-off points with a specific end goal to secure
\nnationals against manhandle of energy. Administrative Court oversees
\nfunctions of the government and other open bodies and also that of inferior
\ncourts and tribunals, this is for the most part practiced through the strategy
\nknown as ‘Judicial Review’<\/p>\n

A Judicial Review is a technique whereby the courts can
\ndecide the legality of a decision or activity made by an authority. It is
\nconcerned about the lawfulness of the basic leadership process rather than the
\nbenefits of the genuine choice. Given that the correct systems have been taken
\nafter when achieving a judgement, the court won’t substitute what it supposes
\nis the right choice which might be put aside in the event that it is observed
\nto be unlawful or completely unreasonable. Feldman’s detailed typology for the
\nway courts can control administrative decision-making is through Directing, the
\nconventional capacity of convincing government to hold fast to expressed
\nlegitimate forces and obligations; Limiting, setting points of confinement to
\nthe activity of watchfulness. For instance, the common law rules against
\nshackling circumspection. Seemingly can affect government structures and basic
\nleadership forms and Structuring which is setting explicit values to guide
\nexecutive decision-making. <\/p>\n

It is the responsibility of the administrative courts to
\nadopt the necessary measures for the execution of all its decisions, likewise
\ntheir duty to advance the counteractive action, end and repair of infringement
\nto qualities and merchandise that are naturally ensured as far as general
\nwellbeing, condition, urbanism, town and nation arranging, personal satisfaction,
\nsocial legacy and products of the State[6]<\/a>,
\nwhen attempted by open substances and as long as they don’t constitute criminal
\noffense or regulatory offense. As important as the reported is the locale of the
\nregulatory courts to control the supervision of the lawfulness of standards and
\ndifferent demonstrations of law from lawful elements of open law under the
\narrangements of the managerial or assessment law and standards and different
\ndemonstrations of law drilled by private people, in particular concessionaries,
\nin the activity of regulatory powers.<\/p>\n

Conclusion:<\/strong><\/p>\n

In conclusion of the above, I can state that the European Union and the Council of the Europe are empowering the UK laws as the European laws and courts have become supreme.\u00a0 UK cannot manage various contemporary problems alone as a state hence, they require the support of the European Union and being a member of it gives them the ownership which no longer leaves the UK Parliament as sovereign. The UK\u2019s legislative, executive and judicial powers are now controlled and operated within the framework of European Union law which supersedes any existing UK law to the contrary. The common Fisheries Policy established by the EEC validates this conclusion as the European Court of Justice ruled that the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 was contrary to community law thus Spanish companies could sue the for compensation. This demonstrates that both the sovereign power of Parliament to legislate and courts in interpreting are now restrained by the EU law.<\/p>\n

Bibliography:<\/strong><\/p>\n