Chapter 7 End-of-chapter questions

Which of the statements below provide accurate accounts of the role courts play in the UK? Select all that apply.

They resolve disputes between private parties.

They hold the government to account.

They provide expert analysis of legislation during its passage.

They inform the behaviour of private and government actors.

In the case of Duport Steel v Sirs [1980] Lord Diplock summarised the orthodox view that 'Parliament makes the laws, the judges interpret them'. However, some allege that, in some circumstances, judges make laws themselves. In what ways might this be true? Select all that apply.

Judges can recommend changes to law, which are put before Parliament following the handing down of the case. If passed, judges could be said to have an active role in the passage of primary legislation.

Judges interpret legislation, sometimes in quite extensive ways, in order to give effect to fundamental common law rights, or values in the Human Rights Act or EU law.

Law often requires judges to apply open-ended terms in a variety of contexts - the determination of what is 'fair' or 'proportionate' gives judges discretion to make law.

Judges have the power to develop the common law.

The position of the Law Lords in the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords caused some controversy prior to the changes made by the Constitutional Reform Act. Below are a number of statements relating to the judges both before and after the changes in that Act came into force. Which of the following are accurate? Select all that apply.

The judges in the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords were once appointed by an informal, internal 'tap on the shoulder' method, which was not at all transparent.

The judges in UK Supreme Court are now appointed by independent selection commissions, and the process is now completely transparent.

The judges in the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords routinely showed signs of political bias and did not behave in a truly independent manner.

The Appellate Committee of the House of Lords used to feature judges who could, in theory, choose to vote in ordinary debates in the House of Lords.

The Appellate Committee of the House of Lords used to sit in the same building as Parliament.

The judges in the UK Supreme Court now sit in a separate building to Parliament.

The idea of 'judicial seclusion' is a popular one, whereby judges are encouraged to insulate themselves from anything which might impact their ability to make neutral, objective decision-making. Why might this idea be flawed? Select all that apply.

(a) Judges can be dismissed by politicians, so there is a constant pressure on the judiciary to behave in politically-acceptable ways.

(b) It does not matter if judges are influenced by outside considerations because the judicial role is limited to interpreting the law based on the words of the statute and precedent. Even then, judicial training is sufficient for judges to completely disregard outside matters.

(c) It is impossible to require judges to discard any and all political or ideological considerations, as preferences and biases, even if subconscious, will play a part in any decision-making activity.

(d) Since judges have to decide issues which invite discretion, and often do so in politically controversial areas, it is impossible for them to decide such cases in an absolutely neutral manner.

There are many reasons which can be put forward as to why we should have more women on the Bench. Which of the following is not a useful argument in this respect?

A more diverse judiciary would increase public confidence in the judges.

It would be beneficial, in the context of collective decision-making, to have more women judges.

Status, such as gender, should not be a barrier to appointment for individuals applying for senior judicial positions.

Those responsible for judicial appointments are under a statutory duty to ensure an even number of men and women on the Bench.

Quiz Content