Winner of the SLS Annual Conference Best Paper Prize 2014: Reframing the judicial diversity debate: personal values and tacit diversity

Legal Studies ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel J Cahill-O'Callaghan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Personal Values ◽  
Psychological Theory ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

It has long been argued that the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords, now the UK Supreme Court, is characterised by Justices who are white and male, with a public school and Oxbridge education. Despite continuous debate and reflection on the lack of diversity, by academics, government and the popular press, little has changed. These debates have centred on explicit diversity, overt characteristics that are easily codified and reflect how the judiciary is seen. Drawing on the psychological theory of decision making, this paper argues that judicial decisions are subject to tacit influences that are not limited to overt characteristics. Personal values serve as one such tacit influence on decision making. Personal values are formed by life experiences and reflect many of the characteristics identified within the explicit diversity debates. However, personal values are influenced by more than simple demographic variables. This paper uses the example of personal values to highlight the fact that despite the lack of explicit diversity, there is an element of tacit diversity in the Supreme Court, which is reflected in judicial decisions. The impact of these findings serves to extend the debates surrounding diversity, highlighting the limitation of debates centred on explicit diversity alone.

Important Bermuda trust decision concerning settlor’s wishes

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 861-863
Author(s):  
Keith Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Important Decision ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Relevant Consideration

Abstract The intersection between the court’s power to bless the decision of a trustee and the impact of a settlor’s wishes on trustee decision-making has recently been considered by the Supreme Court of Bermuda in the important decision of In the Matter of the R Trust. In blessing the decision of the trustee in this case, the court referred with approval of the dicta of the UK Supreme Court in Pitt v Holt that the settlor’s wishes are simply a “relevant consideration”.

The constitutional influence of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on the UK apex court: institutional proximity and jurisprudential divergence?

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 285-302
Author(s):  
Roger Masterman
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
Proportionality Test ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

It is often claimed that the constitutional role of the UK’s apex court is enriched as a result of the experiences of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as interpreter of constitutions within its overseas jurisdiction. This paper considers the relationship between the House of Lords/UK Supreme Court and the Judicial Committee and its effect on the importation of external influences into the UK’s legal system(s), further seeking to assess how far the jurisprudence of the Judicial Committee has influenced constitutional decision-making in the UK apex court. While ad hoc citation of Privy Council authorities in House of Lords/Supreme Court decisions is relatively commonplace, a post-1998 enthusiasm for reliance on Judicial Committee authority – relating to (i) a ‘generous and purposive’ approach to constitutional interpretation and (ii) supporting the developing domestic test for proportionality – quickly faded. Both areas are illustrative of a diminishing reliance on Judicial Committee authority, but reveal divergent approaches to constitutional borrowing as the UK apex court has incrementally mapped the contours of an autochthonous constitutionalism while simultaneously recognising the trans-jurisdictional qualities of the proportionality test.

Commitment and Cooperation on High Courts

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Alarie ◽  
Andrew J. Green
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
High Courts ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Indian Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
High Court Of Australia

This chapter sets out and justifies the building blocks of commitment and cooperation. These two dimensions allow the authors to situate high courts relative to each other. They use them to focus on the five main high courts in their study, namely, the US Supreme Court, the UK Supreme Court (and its predecessor House of Lords), the Supreme Court of Canada, the High Court of Australia, and the Indian Supreme Court. This chapter provides both a preliminary assessment of how these courts sit relative to each other along these two dimensions and a brief overview of the key design choices made by each of these courts.

Cross-fertilisation of Constitutional Ideas

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Butler
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

This chapter discusses the New Zealand courts' jurisprudence in regard to the interpretative provisions — sections 4, 5, and 6 — of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. It not only gives an overview of the relevant New Zealand case law but also compares the courts' approaches to those of their UK counterparts, in particular the UK Supreme Court (formerly, the House of Lords) in regard to section 3 of the UK Human Rights Act 1998. It is argued that the perceived difference in the approaches can be explained by different contexts rather than different methodology. The chapter thereby questions the view held in New Zealand that the UK courts, and especially the Supreme Court, are more activist than the New Zealand courts.

The ‘reasonable patient’ of 2025 envisioned (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Dowie ◽  
Mette Kjer Kaltoft
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Education ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Integrated Care ◽  
Medical Practice ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Made In

UNSTRUCTURED . The verdict of the UK Supreme court in the case of Bellman versus Boojum-Snark Integrated Care Trust (2025) will have profound implications for all medical practice, medical education and medical research, as well as the regulation of medicine and allied healthcare fields. Major changes will result from the judgment made in favour of Bellman’s negligence claim, reflecting an expanded and more precise definition of informed and preference-based consent, compared with that in Montgomery (2015) and also with the principles laid out in the UK GMC guidance on Decision Making and Consent (2020). (In case of doubt, this is a vision paper.)

SHORN-OFF COMPLICITY

2016 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 196-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Dyson
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Council Decision ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Common Purpose ◽  
The Common ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Additional Form

CRIMINAL complicity has been dramatically changed by the combined decisions of the UK Supreme Court and the Privy Council in Jogee; Ruddock [2016] UKSC 8; [2016] UKPC 7; [2016] 2 W.L.R. 681. At least since the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861, it has been settled that a person (S) who has intentionally assisted or encouraged another (P) to commit a crime has been liable to be tried, convicted, and punished as if S was a principal. For decades, there has also been a much-debated, additional form of complicity where the accomplice was “parasitically” liable for further crimes committed by P beyond the scope of a common criminal purpose shared by S and P. For that kind of liability, the accomplice need not have assisted or encouraged the further crime but need only have foreseen that it was a possible incident of the common purpose. The effect of Jogee and Ruddock is that this further form of complicity, first recognised explicitly in the Privy Council decision of Chan Wing-Siu [1985] A.C. 168 and later endorsed by the House of Lords in Powell; English [1999] 1 A.C. 1, has been shorn off the criminal law. As a result, Chan Wing-Siu directions will no longer be given to juries.

3. Duty of care: basic principles

Tort Law ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 58-77
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

This chapter begins by tracing the development of the duty of care starting with the case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]. It goes on to consider the various general tests developed and used by the courts in order to establish when a duty of care is owed. Finally, the chapter discusses the ‘incremental and by analogy’ and so-called Caparo three-stage ‘test’ established by the House of Lords in Caparo Industries v Dickman [1990] and recently reconsidered by the UK Supreme Court in Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2018].

3. Duty of care: basic principles

2021 ◽  
pp. 58-77
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

This chapter begins by tracing the development of the duty of care starting with the case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]. It goes on to consider the various general tests developed and used by the courts in order to establish when a duty of care is owed. Finally, the chapter discusses the ‘incremental and by analogy’ and so-called Caparo three-stage ‘test’ established by the House of Lords in Caparo Industries v Dickman [1990] and recently reconsidered by the UK Supreme Court in Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2018].

scholarly journals Are essay mills committing fraud? A further analysis of their behaviours vs the 2006 fraud act (UK)

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Draper ◽  
Callum Reid-Hutchings
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Lead Author ◽  
Contract Cheating ◽  
The Law ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
Recent Action ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Advertising Standards

AbstractMany strategies have been proposed to address the supply of bespoke essays and other assignments by companies often described as ‘Essay Mills’ with the act of supply and use being invariably described as ‘contract cheating’. These proposals increasingly refer to the law as a solution in common with other action. In this article, the lead author revisits work undertaken in 2016 as a result of recent legal and extra-legal developments to assess whether the UK Fraud Act (2006) might now be used to tackle some of the activities of the companies involved, by comparing their common practises, and their Terms and Conditions, with the Act. It was previously found that all sites have disclaimers regarding the use of their products but there were some obvious contradictions in the activities of the sites which undermined those disclaimers, for example plagiarism-free guarantees for the work. In this article, we ask and consider the question whether this is still the case having regard to the impact of a change in the law by the UK supreme court and recent action of the UK Advertising Standards Authority. We also consider whether a call for a new offence to be created which specifically targets the undesirable behaviours of these companies is still justified.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document