Friday, 21 November 2025

THE EUROPEAN DIMENSION - Based on Glanville Williams' Learning the Law

 1. Introduction: Why the European Dimension Matters

Glanville Williams explains that modern British law cannot be fully understood without acknowledging the impact of European legal institutions. He notes that the law is no longer shaped only by Parliament and the courts of the United Kingdom. Instead, many areas are influenced by European rules and decisions. Williams remarks that English lawyers must accept that "European law forms part of our own law and may override it"—a major shift from the older belief that Parliament is fully sovereign in all matters.

Before Brexit, the UK’s membership in the European Community (EC) meant that European law had direct effect in national courts. Williams emphasises that European institutions had the power to create laws that applied to all member states uniformly. This meant that judges in the UK were often required to interpret domestic law in a way that aligned with European principles.

2. The European Community: Basic Purpose

Glanville Williams outlines the aim of the European Community: to create economic unity among member states and to remove trade barriers. The EC was not merely a trading bloc; it also gradually developed into a wider legal and political framework. Williams explains that the Community sought to create “a common market,” ensuring free movement of goods, services, capital, and people.

To achieve this, the Community was built on a system of institutions that could make rules binding on all member states. Williams stresses that these institutions were not foreign bodies interfering in national life; rather, they were part of a cooperative structure to maintain equal standards across Europe.

3. The Principal Institutions of the European Community

Williams gives a clear outline of the major institutions that shape European law. Each plays a different role but together form a balanced structure of law-making and supervision.

The main institutions are:

·         Council of Ministers

·         Commission

·         European Parliament

·         European Court of Justice (ECJ)

·         Court of Auditors

4. The Council of Ministers

Williams describes the Council of Ministers as the primary decision-making body. It represents the governments of the member states. The council is not a single fixed group. Instead, ministers from each country attend depending on the subject being discussed—for example, agricultural ministers when dealing with agriculture.

The Council passes regulations and directives. These can have direct effect in member states. Williams notes that the Council’s authority shows how European rules can “operate automatically within national legal systems,” meaning they do not always require a special Act of Parliament.

5. The Commission

The Commission acts as the executive arm of the European Community. Williams explains that it has two main duties:

·         To propose legislation to the Council.

·         To ensure that member states comply with European law.

The Commission can bring proceedings before the European Court of Justice if a member state fails to follow Community obligations. Williams highlights the Commission’s role as a “guardian of the Treaties,” ensuring fairness and uniformity.

6. The European Parliament

Although the early European Parliament had limited legislative powers, Williams observes that it played an important advisory and supervisory role. It reviewed proposals and questioned other institutions. With time, it gained stronger democratic relevance because its members were directly elected by citizens of member states.

Williams notes that the Parliament provided a democratic voice within the European framework, ensuring that European institutions were not purely bureaucratic.

7. The European Court of Justice (ECJ)

Williams places special importance on the ECJ because its decisions have direct implications for British courts. He says that the ECJ is responsible for maintaining uniform interpretation of European law across all member states. Without a central court, each country would interpret European rules differently, leading to confusion.

The ECJ ensures:

·         Treaties are interpreted consistently

·         Regulations and directives are enforced uniformly

·         National courts have guidance on European issues

Williams notes that European law has supremacy when a conflict exists between European rules and national legislation. British courts must “give effect to Community law even if it conflicts with an Act of Parliament”—a principle that was sometimes unsettling for English lawyers.

8. The Preliminary Ruling Procedure

One of the most important tools described by Williams is the preliminary ruling procedure. National courts may refer a question to the ECJ when they are unsure how to interpret a European provision.

Williams explains that:

·         Courts of final appeal must refer questions of interpretation.

·         Lower courts may refer if needed.

This mechanism ensures that European law remains uniform across all countries. Williams emphasises that this is not an appeal system; rather, national courts retain responsibility for deciding the case. The ECJ only answers the question of interpretation. This system builds a cooperative relationship between European and national courts.

9. The Court of Auditors

Williams briefly describes the role of the Court of Auditors. It examines the financial activities of the Community to ensure that funds are properly used. While less famous than the ECJ, it is essential for maintaining trust and accountability.

10. Other Relevant Institutions

Williams also mentions several other bodies connected to the Community’s work, such as advisory committees that assist in technical or specialised areas. These institutions are part of the broader administrative network that keeps the European system functioning smoothly.

11. European Sources of Law

European law is made through several instruments:

·         Treaties, which form the constitutional basis.

·         Regulations, which have direct effect and are binding in their entirety.

·         Directives, which bind member states but allow flexibility in implementation.

·         Decisions, which apply only to specific individuals or states.

·         Recommendations and opinions, which have no binding force.

Williams notes that these different instruments have different legal effects. Regulations operate automatically. Directives need national implementation, but if a state fails to act, citizens may still rely on the directive in some circumstances. This is one of the innovations that made European law powerful.

12. Relationship between European Law and UK Law

Glanville Williams highlights a major constitutional shift: the idea that Parliament is not completely supreme in areas governed by European law. He stresses that once the UK accepted the Treaty obligations, it also accepted the authority of the European legal system.

He states that “Community law takes precedence over national law”, and courts must apply it even where domestic legislation appears contradictory. Williams acknowledges that this principle was difficult for traditional English lawyers, who were used to thinking of Parliament as the final authority.

The European system required judges to take a more flexible and international approach. Williams believes this was ultimately beneficial because it encouraged clarity, harmony, and cooperation.

13. Conclusion: A New Legal Landscape

In closing, Williams argues that the English legal system became deeply connected to European institutions. Lawyers must understand how European mechanisms operate, how European rules are created, and how the ECJ influences national courts. This “European dimension” changed legal thinking, encouraged a broader outlook, and introduced a system where international cooperation shapes domestic law.

The chapter stresses that understanding modern law requires understanding the European framework, because it provided structure, rules, and interpretations that no national system could replace on its own.

Monday, 17 November 2025

SHORT NOTES - MOOTS AND MOCK TRIALS

 1. Purpose of Moots & Mock Trials

 

 Written by Glanville Williams to explain:

 

   Importance of mooting and mock trials.

   How they work.

   How to conduct them.

 Goal: improve legal speaking skills, persuasion, confidence, and familiarity with court procedure.

 

 2. Importance of Oratory for Lawyers

 Speaking well is essential for every lawyer.

 Mooting helps students improve:

 

   Fluency

   Clear speech

   Persuasive argument

   Quick, structured presentation

   Confidence in court

 Public speaking practice is strongly encouraged.

 

 3. How Moots Are Organised

 Usually arranged by a Students’ Law Society, with help from:

 

   Faculty members

   Practising lawyers

 National and international moots mentioned:

 

   Weekly Law Reports Mooting Competition

   Observer Moot

   Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition

 

 4. Structure and Procedure of a Moot

 Organiser provides rules and details in advance.

 Normally includes:

 

   Two issues/points for argument.

   Two pairs of lawyers (Leader & Junior on each side).

 Skeleton arguments and list of authorities must be shared with opponents and judge beforehand.

 Helps clarify issues and save time.

 

 5. Reports of Cases & Time Use

 Ideally, physical law report volumes should be brought to the moot.

 If unavailable:

 

   Mooters prepare lists of authorities.

   Provide photocopies/printed judgments for everyone including judge.

 Time recommended: 30–40 minutes per side, divided between Leader and Junior.

 

 6. Courtroom Decorum

 Counsel and judges must follow real-life court etiquette.

 Key rules:

 

   Stand when addressing the court.

   Sit when opponent speaks.

   Refer to:

 

     Own team: “my learned leader/junior”

     Opponents: “my learned friend”

   Address judge as:

 

     “My Lord/My Lady” (direct address)

     “Your Lordship/Your Ladyship” (indirect reference)

 Standard opening formula:

 

 “May it please your Lordship(s), I appear with Mr/Miss ___ for the plaintiff/prosecution/appellant…”

 Female judges: “my Lady,” “Your Ladyship”.

 

 7. How to Present Arguments in Moots

 Start by outlining:

 

   What you intend to prove.

   Main points.

   Which points your junior will handle.

 Respond to the judge’s cues:

 

   If judge agrees with a point, move on.

 Main tips for oral advocacy:

 

   Speak slowly and clearly.

   Avoid reading the whole speech.

   Maintain eye contact.

   Avoid monotone voice.

   State key points strongly and pause briefly.

 

 8. Public Speaking Tips (from Williams)

 Prepare a structured speech with numbered points.

 Write the speech → edit → polish.

 Create a short summary for use during speaking.

 Practise repeatedly, but don’t memorise word-for-word.

 Use normal tone and pace.

 Don’t hide behind furniture.

 Have a friend watch and give feedback.

 

 9. What is a Mock Trial?

 Different from a moot:

 

   Moot = legal argument before a judge.

   Mock trial = simulated jury trial with witnesses.

 Features:

 

   Often humorous or entertaining.

   Witnesses and lawyers may dress up.

   Audience may include non-lawyers.

   Unrehearsed → requires strong forensic skills.

   Often structured like a “whodunit”.

 

 10. Two Ways to Prepare the Case

1. Witnesses act out the events beforehand

 

    More realistic, especially for cross-examination.

    Allows student “solicitors” to conduct interviews and prepare briefs.

 

2. Witnesses receive written statements

 

    Easier to arrange; witnesses memorise their roles.

 

 Use familiar locations and limit to 5–6 witnesses.

 

 11. The Game of “Alibi”

 Audience divided into small groups.

 Each group has:

 

   Two defence “suspects”

   Two prosecution lawyers

 Suspects create an alibi in 10 minutes.

 Each is cross-examined separately.

 Prosecution highlights contradictions.

 Jury votes based on inconsistencies.

 Helps students practise:

 

   Cross-examination

   Quick thinking

   Exposing contradictions

 

 12. Game of “False Evidence”

 Three masked defendants; one is fake (false identity).

 Counsel interrogates each to discover the imposter.

 Defendants and their witnesses submit written life summaries beforehand.

 Counsel tries to expose differences between testimonies.

 Jury decides which is false.

 Encourages:

 

   Analytical questioning

   Comparison of evidence

   Trial skills

 

 13. The “Third Degree” Game

 One defendant receives an outline alibi and must invent details under pressure.

 Can be “gonged” for:

 

   Hesitation

   “I think” answers

   Contradictions

 Others ask rapid questions for 15 minutes.

 Helps develop:

 

   Quick reasoning

   Maintaining consistency under stress

   Interrogation skills

 

 14. Overall Theme

 Moot courts and mock trials:

 

   Teach legal procedure.

   Build speaking and advocacy skills.

   Develop confidence and professionalism.

   Prepare students for real courtroom experiences.

*****