...Asif Tufal DELEGATED LEGISLATION DEFINITION Law made by some person/body under powers deriving from an Act of Parliament. That statute is known as a “parent” or enabling Act. An example is: TYPES OF DELEGATED LEGISLATION Statutory Instruments are Bye-Laws are made by local Orders in Council are laws regulations made by made by and with the advice authorities to cover matters of Her Majesty’s Privy Government Ministers and within their own area. An Departments. An example is: example is: Council and are used, for example, for transferring responsibilities between Government Departments, extending legislation to the Channel Islands, and under the Emergency Powers Act 1920. They can also be made by certain public corporations An example is the and certain companies for Government controlling fuel matters within their jurisdiction which involve the supplies during the fuel crisis in 2000. public. An example is: ADVANTAGES Saves Parliamentary time. Parliament passes the parent Act and those with technical expertise or necessary knowledge can fill in the details. Government Ministers often consult interested bodies and parties before drafting statutory instruments. Delegated legislation is more flexible than an Act of Parliament. It can be passed quickly and easily amended or revoked, so that the law is up to date. www.lawteacher.net DISADVANTAGES It is undemocratic (except for bye-laws). Sub-delegation occurs whereby law making power is passed on to civil servants by Government...
Words: 527 - Pages: 3
...There has always been much debate and deliberation throughout the years over the controversial topic of self-defence. This level of disputation is especially heightened when factors of innocents come into play, particularly that of an innocent threat. An innocent threat is that which threatens your right to live however is not acting from an intention to kill you. Such that - even though regarded as ‘innocent’ - still imposes an issue to oneself that if no action is taken this undeniable threat will kill you or cause harm. Therefore action proportional to the threat, I believe must be put under the banner of self-defence and as result be deemed permissible. Throughout philosophical history two main concepts upon innocence and self-defence have shone through; the restrictive theory and the permissive theory. The restrictive theory very much supports innocence as a holistic body in that even though a threat, the threat remains innocent thus it is impermissible to cause harm or death. On the other side of the spectrum is the permissive theory. This theory supports the man that is being threatened as it believes threats immediately lose their right to live, thus it is permissible to defend oneself. The restrictive theory is more so then not based on rights whilst the permissive theory embodies a more intuitive and consequential approach hence why it is better for worldly application. J.J. Thompson - a philosopher whose field is in ethics and applied ethics - is in full support...
Words: 1387 - Pages: 6
...One example of keeping oneself safe is self-defence. Self-defence is a right that can be used to justify a homicide. According to Article 12 of the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, “Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.” It exists under the United States law making it legal to defend oneself from any harm that may occur to them or someone else. There are a variety of places that teaches different forms of self-defence such as military combatives, armed and unarmed fighting styles and rape prevention. Multiple people use these different techniques to save themselves from a situation they don’t feel comfortable in and feel as though their life is threatened. In The Crucible, a play written by Arthur Miller, the whole plot in the story was about the people in Salem using 2 during the Salem Witch Trials. The people in the play thought that they were in danger because of the ‘witches’ roaming around their homes. They believed that the ‘witches’...
Words: 1147 - Pages: 5
...In the article “The Coroners and Justice Act 2009-patial defence to murder (1) Loss of control”, the professor Alan Norrie is debating the new law which came into force in 2010 regarding the partial defence of loss of self-control. The article is based on the Law Commission’s approaches to this subject and the amendments brought in the law which now covers loss of control arising from anger or fear. The article offers an objective revise of the new law in a criticizing manner and few arguments in comparing it with the old law. The article is divided in seven parts, each part discuss about an element of the partial defence. In the first part of the article the professor explains the 2009 Act and then continues further on with evaluating the way in which the elements of loss of self-control have changed. Murders before coming into force of the s55 of the Coroners and Justice Act was governed by the partial defence of the provocation. Under the provocation defence the defendant was required to show that he/she lost their self-control due to things said or done. Provocation has its roots in the seventeen century, and its basis was set out in the judgement of Devlin J in Duffy.The common law concept was amended by s.3 of the Homicide Act 1957 and was establishing that the trigger had to be some form of human action. The Duffy definition was extended by further case law which were stating that the provocation did not have to come from the victim and it did had to be directed at the...
Words: 2995 - Pages: 12
...provided by Pistorius and his lawyers at the bail hearing, the disputed element of the crime will be fault. You can only be found guilty of murder if you unlawfully and intentionally killed another person. You can be found guilty of culpable homicide if you unlawfully and negligently killed another person. There is no dispute that the killing of Reeva Steenkamp was unlawful as it would be impossible to argue that Pistorius acted in self-defence (or private defence, as it is known in law). You can only rely on self-defence to exclude unlawfulness if an attack on your life (or the life of another), on your property or other similar interest has commenced or is imminent. This is an objective test, so where no attack actually occurred, one cannot rely on self-defence to justify the killing of another person, which you thought was necessary to defend yourself. No such attack occurred or was imminent in this case. (Whether the common law should be developed in line with the values in the Constitution to restrict the right to kill others in defence of your property, is an interesting question, which I cannot discuss here.) The question then is whether the accused had the requisite intention to kill another...
Words: 1318 - Pages: 6
...this journal is available at http://www.emerald-library.com/ft Journal of Managerial Psychology 16,7 534 Received September 2000 Revised May 2001 Accepted May 2001 Resistance to organisational change: the role of defence mechanisms Wayne H. Bovey Bovey Management (Certified Consultants), Queensland, Australia Andrew Hede University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia Keywords Organizational change, Resistance, Defence, Humour Abstract Observes that the published literature on resistance to organisational change has focused more on organisational issues rather than individual psychological factors. The present study investigated the role of both adaptive and maladaptive defence mechanisms in individual resistance. Surveys were conducted in nine organisations undergoing major change and responses were obtained from 615 employees. The results indicate that five maladaptive defence mechanisms are positively correlated with behavioural intention to resist change, namely, projection, acting out, isolation of affect, dissociation and denial. The adaptive defence mechanism of humour was found to be negatively correlated with resistance intention. Identifies two intervention strategies which can be used by management to address the effects of defence mechanisms on resistance during periods of change in organisations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 7, 2001, pp. 534-548. # MCB University Press, 0268-3946 Introduction Individuals go through a reaction...
Words: 6068 - Pages: 25
...Faculty of Law, Governance and International Relations Law Section LL1014 CRIMINAL LAW I Autumn Semester 2011 ESSAY AND QUESTION Introduction The below report will be discussing the criminal liability of husband Tom, and Nurse Freya in the death of Rachel. An analysis will be conducted on each defendant and charges against each of them will be established along with definitions of each offence. The principles of causation, actus reus (AR) and mens rea (MR) will be discussed and relevant laws applied to the facts within each case and relevant laws applied. The first section of the report, R v Tom we will be discussing the criminal liability of Tom in the death of Rachel in which both murder and manslaughter charges will be considered. The AR for both of these offences is the same and can be defined as “The unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen’s peace.”[1] Assuming the victim was alive that this scenario was not during a war, it remains to establish that this was an unlawful killing. In the case of R v Freya we will focus on the AR of omission and determine whether the defendant Nurse Freya did the act or omitted to do a legally recognised duty which resulted in the death of Rachel. We will also decide whether the act was deliberate, unlawful, and a significant cause of death. In the case of R v Freya only a charge of manslaughter will be considered as Nurse Freya had neither the direct...
Words: 2454 - Pages: 10
...THE DEFENCE OF PROVOCATION There are three special defences to the charge of murder. These defences are: provocation, diminished responsibility and suicide pact. These defences were introduced in the Homicide Act 1957 because it was felt that the charge of murder might be unfair and harsh in some circumstances. It is important to remember that the special defences are partial defences; they do not acquit the defendant of the charge but reduce it to voluntary manslaughter. One of the key advantages to being convicted of manslaughter rather than murder is that the judge can avoid imposing the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment. For manslaughter the sentence is at the judge’s discretion. Provocation Section 3 of the Homicide Act 1957 states: ‘Where there is evidence that the person charged with murder was provoked (by things done or said or both) the question as to whether it would make a reasonable man do this is left to the jury’. A wide range of things said or done can constitute provocation. It must be left entirely to the jury to decide what constitutes provocation. The provocation need not even be deliberate on the part of the victim. In Doughty (1986), a man killed his 19-day-old child who would not stop crying. The jury accepted the defence of provocation, and the charged was reduced to voluntary manslaughter. R v Duffy (1949) established that for provocation to succeed as a defence there must have been ‘A sudden and temporary loss of self control...
Words: 785 - Pages: 4
...Introduction A. Background of the study Pepper spray is a lachrymatory agent used for self-defence, policing, and riot control where capsaicin is an active ingredient that is found at chilli peppers. It has been used as a means of self defence mostly against rabid dogs, and cases where a victim needs time to escape. Possession and usage of pepper spray in the Philippines for self-defence is legal, and it is freely available in stores. This study itself can statistically bring down cases of rape, rabies and murder related deaths without causing too much physical injury and without permanent damage. B. Significance of the study This study’s significance is already proven in itself. This can be a quick method to evade many forms of danger. This can contribute to public awareness and give a lot of people to defend themselves against aggressors. This pepper spray is a less harmful version of the commercial pepper spray. It triggers pain receptors in the eyes of the aggressor. C. Statement of the Problem This study aims to make improvised pepper spray out of the chilli peppers we mostly find. Would this help many people evade many types of danger when possible? Can this cause too much physical injury? Is it just somehow easy to prepare and use? How much time the victim is given to escape using this method of self-defence? D. Scope and Limitation This is about making a self defence weapon without causing grievous injury or permanent damage to anything causing danger. However...
Words: 908 - Pages: 4
...[threatening action qualified by words] Battery: unlawful and direct application of force on another person without that person’s consent • presence of consent means no battery • beyond the bounds of acceptable conduct • force or physical injury not a requirement for tort • Collins v Wilcock [contact not actionable if generally acceptable in the ordinary conduct of everyday life] False Imprisonment: unlawful detention or restraint of liberty of a person • restraint must be total • the only means of escape is unreasonable • person who continues the imprisonment commits the tort • may be physical or psychological • generally not false imprisonment to fail to release someone on your property, Burns v Johnston Defences: • Consent - main defence to trespass claim - medical context: must be voluntary, interventions on the consent of adults (over 16 medically) can be allowed if they are in the best interests of the person - capacity of minors: minor must be able to understand what the procedure involves to give consent, parent/guardian can give consent, court can overrule decision against life-saving treatment, Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [competent minors can give consent if they are under the age of 16 if they understand the nature of the treatment], no direct Irish authority (apply Gillick), best interests and...
Words: 532 - Pages: 3
...Crimea Joins Russia: What About International Law? The deadlock in the UN Security Council combined with Russia’s disregard for Western approval have the U.S. and its allies stymied Back on March 4, American President Barack Obama talked about the crisis in Crimea: “There is a strong belief that Russia’s action is violating international law. I know President Putin seems to have a different set of lawyers making a different set of interpretations, but I don’t think that’s fooling anybody.” On the basis of Obama’s words, one can assume international law to be nothing beyond a set of beliefs that are classified as acceptable or unacceptable, depending on which side of the spectrum one chooses to stand. As a result, when Crimean voters decided to secede from Ukraine and unite with Russia, what role did international law play in the picture? Again, you cannot properly define something that is viewed as more a matter of ‘strong belief’ than that of ‘codified norms’, but the verdicts and opinions of the International Court of Justice are well worth discussing here. The Examples of Kosovo and Northern Cyprus Kosovo had unilaterally declared its independence in 2008. Two years later, in 2010, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) stated that unilateral declarations of independence were not prohibited under international law and as a result, Kosovo had every right to declare its independence. However, citing the example of Northern Cyprus, the ICJ further added that such unilateral...
Words: 831 - Pages: 4
...http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/insanity_discussion_summary.pdf Definition: The insanity defence is set out in the “M’Naghten Rules” as laid down by the House of Lords in 1843. Must be suffering from the three points; Defect of reason, disease of the mind and not to know that doing or/ not to know it’s wrong. Burden of proof on D to show the balance of probabilities they are insane. It is generally accepted that there are problems with insanity. In only about 30 crown court cases a year is insanity used as a defence successfully in England and wales – this is a bad thing as the majority of offenders, prisoners have issues and self-medicate on drugs and become addicted and underlying health problems are never addressed. And therefore insanity defence could be used but isn’t. Unfair on people who could have qualified to use it but didn’t and are convicted. There are different disposals of it whether you are in the magistrates or in the crown court. ‘Disposed’ of differently in Magistrates where an order made under the mental health act 1983. Prosecution can raise insanity as an issue. Problems: 1. ‘Disease of the mind’ – M’Naughten in 1843, led to case law that distinguishes internal and external factors and as a result you get cases like Hennessy and Quick (diabetes). Insane meant something else back in 1843 and wouldn’t be associated with things such as diabetes and sleepwalking. Mind doesn’t mean brain; sleepwalking (burgess) and epilepsy...
Words: 1071 - Pages: 5
...in Japan and other countries, criminals have guns, they usually only use them fight among themselves. Ordinary citizens’ gun deaths are extremely rare. There is no reason to have a gun when you have a police force and army. The second revision of the constitution, there is no police force and no standing army. We do not need a second amendment right now. "Constitution" expressly provides that possession of a firearm in the United States is intended to enable the public to form a militia. We do not need to form a militia! We have to police and military forces. The Constitution does not for any other purpose, rather than forming a militia weapons to protect ownership. In addition, traditional hunting and self-defence argument is outdated (hunting) and misleading (self-defence). There is a example from a news is on October 22 The Government will not consider the country's citizens...
Words: 972 - Pages: 4
...Murder: The definition of murder is ‘the unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being and under the King’s peace with malice aforethought, express or implied…’ (Sir Edward Coke) Murder is split into three elements they’re: Unlawful; killing e.g. contract/railway worker (Pittwood), a reasonable person in being e.g. foetus (AG Ref (no 3 of 1994) 1997 and finally under the King’s peace so that’s the exemption for killing in a war. Actus Reus for murder is the guilty physical act, it’s when the prosecution proves that D’s act caused V’s death and to prove that they use the causation test which split into two: factual causation (But for test) and legal causation. Factual causation is ‘but for D’s conduct this would not have happened e.g. the White case whereby the defendant had cyanide the mothers drink however se had a heart attack before however White was still found guilty for attempted murder. Moving onto legal causation this is the link between the act and consequences, also it’s when D’s conduct was the cause of death it has to be more than minimal but not substantial, D’s contribution can be sufficient as this occurred in the Cato case (Heroin addicts). A break in the chain of causation arises where there is a new intervening act or ‘novus actus interveniens’, the two cases which illustrate the principles of causation are the cases of R v Smith (1959) and R v Jordan (1956). The Jordan case there was medical intervention, The Court of Appeal upheld the defendant’s appeal...
Words: 1713 - Pages: 7
...Should people be allowed to carry gun for self-defence? The function of gun has been a heat discussion since gun had been created. There are people suggested that guns should be used as self-defence and individuals should be allowed to carry guns. Around the world today, there are countries that people can own gun lawfully and there are some that strictly control gun. It seems true that gun can protect people as well as their properties since gun has the power to cause huge damage in the blink of an eye, but we cannot deny the fact that gun is dangerous and has massive potential threat. With a gun, a person can easily injured and even killed others without much difficulties. People carrying guns might also has negative influence on the whole society and the security of individuals. As everything has its two sides, should people be allowed to carry gun for self-defence is always a controversial topic. In my point of view, I believe that people own gun has more drawbacks than advantages. Gun is famous for its massive lethality and is known as one of the most deadly weapons on earth. It is originally created for killing but not defence. Some people argued that carrying gun for self-defence should be allowed since gun has high efficiency and can cause injury in just a second. With a gun, the possibility of successfully saving and defencing yourself would be much higher. It is an undeniable fact that gun at some level does give people a scene of secure, but can gun protect everybody...
Words: 998 - Pages: 4
