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.

*****

SHORT NOTES - INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

1. Why Statutory Interpretation Matters

 Glanville Williams says it is not taught enough, but it is very important.

 Statutes need interpretation because words can be unclear or broad.

 Lawyers must understand how acts are structured and how courts interpret them.

 

 2. What is a Statute?

 A written law passed by Parliament.

 It can:

 

   Prohibit actions

   Require actions

   Make declarations

   Create institutions for public benefit

 

 3. Structure of a Statute

An Act of Parliament usually contains:

 

1. Short title

2. Long title

3. Date of Royal Assent

4. Enacting formula

5. Sections & subsections

6. Marginal notes

7. Citation

8. Extent (territorial scope)

9. Commencement date

10. Definition sections

11. Savings & repeals

12. Schedules

 

Important distinction:

 

 Enacting parts = actual law (sections, subsections).

 Non-enacting parts = helpful but not legally powerful (headings, marginal notes, punctuation).

 

 4. Importance of Context

 Only the words of the statute are the law.

 MPs cannot explain what they “meant” in court.

 Words may have a broad or “disembodied” meaning.

 However, statutes still have a general purpose reflected in their wording.

 

 5. Definition Sections

 Always check if the Act defines a word specially.

 Definitions may appear in another section and are NOT clearly signposted.

 Students and lawyers must locate definitions themselves.

 

 6. Interpretation Based on Policy (Fringe Meaning)

 Courts often try to guess Parliament’s intention, even though true intention is impossible to know.

 Meaning is often based on:

 

   Purpose of the Act

   Common sense

   Social needs

   Fairness

 Example: In a compensation case, “murder” was interpreted as an “accident” because it fit the Act’s purpose of supporting workers’ families.

 

 7. The Literal Rule

 Words must be given their ordinary, natural meaning.

 No adding, removing, or modifying words.

 Used only when the wording is clear and unambiguous.

 Also known as the Plain Meaning Rule.

 Focus: What do the words say on their face?

 

 8. The Mischief Rule (Purposive Approach)

 From Heydon’s Case (1584).

 Court asks:

 

  1. What was the law before the Act?

  2. What problem (mischief) existed?

  3. What remedy did Parliament intend?

  4. What interpretation best fixes the mischief?

 Used when words can have multiple meanings.

 Purpose: give effect to the statute’s purpose.

 

 9. The Golden Rule

Allows judges to avoid absurd or unreasonable results.

 Court may depart from the literal meaning.

 Two applications:

 

  1. Narrow sense: Resolve ambiguity between two possible meanings.

  2. Wide sense: Use even when only one meaning exists but leads to absurd or unfair results.

 

 10. Presumptions in Interpretation

Courts assume Parliament does not intend certain results unless clearly stated. Key presumptions:

 

1. No retroactive effect (except procedure).

2. Act applies only within the UK unless stated otherwise.

3. No interference with vested rights.

4. No taking of property without compensation.

5. No interference with contracts (now less strong).

 

These presumptions protect fairness and property rights.

*****

SHORT NOTES - CASE LAW TECHNIQUE

CASE LAW TECHNIQUE

 

 1. Ratio Decidendi

 

 Meaning: “Reason for the decision”; the legal principle essential to the judgment.

 Importance: Forms binding precedent for lower courts.

 Purpose of doctrine of precedent: Similar material facts → similar decisions.

  (Not all facts must be identical, only the legally material ones.)

 Ratio = Material facts + Court’s decision.

 Example of identifying material facts:

 

   Irrelevant facts: claimant’s appearance, day of accident, etc.

   Relevant facts: negligent driving + injury caused.

 Formula:

  If Case 1: Facts B & C → Conclusion X

  Then Case 2: If Facts B & C exist → Must reach Conclusion X.

 Case examples:

 

   Wilkinson v Downton (1897) created ratio → Anyone who deliberately performs an act likely to cause physical harm is liable in tort.

   Janvier v Sweeney (1919) applied this same ratio because facts were similar.

 

 2. Obiter Dictum

 

 Meaning: A judge’s remark “by the way,” not essential to the decision.

 Not binding but may be persuasive, depending on:

 

   Judge’s reputation

   Court’s level

   Context

 Example:

  In Wilkinson v Downton, the judge discussed whether damages could be claimed for deceit.

 

   This discussion was not the basis of the decision → obiter dictum.

 

---

 

 3. How Much of a Case to Remember?

 

 Don’t memorize every detail of the facts.

 Remember:

 

  1. (2) Important (material) facts

  2. (3) The ratio decidendi

 Don’t remember:

 

   (1) All facts of the case — unnecessary and time-wasting.

 

 

 4. Divergent Opinions

 

 Sometimes judges in higher courts (like House of Lords, now Supreme Court) give different opinions.

 This makes finding the ratio difficult.

 If no clear majority reasoning:

 

   Ratio = material facts supported by majority votes of the judges.

 Court of Appeal often gives one single judgment to avoid confusion.

 

 

 5. Hierarchy of Authority

 

 Binding force depends on the rank of the deciding court.

 Higher courts bind lower courts.

 Some courts (like Court of Appeal) may bind themselves.

 Reversal vs. Overruling:

 

   Reversal: Same case is overturned on appeal.

   Overruling: Higher court says a previous lower court decision was wrong.

 

 

 6. Factors Affecting Weight of a Decision

 

 Authority of a decision increases if:

 

   Decided by highly respected judges.

   Decided by a large panel of judges.

   Judgment was reserved (C.A.V. — court took time to consider).

   Case has been followed repeatedly.

   Case has shaped commercial or property expectations.

 Long-established precedents are harder to overturn.

 A very recent precedent may appear unstable if changed quickly.

*****