Law Making — Cambridge OCR A-Level Law
In summary: Explain the types and control of delegated legislation. Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages Key exam tip: Always structure evaluation answers to first explain the types and controls before weighing advantages and disadvantages.
Exam Tips for Law Making
- Always structure evaluation answers to first explain the types and controls before weighing advantages and disadvantages.
- Use specific case law examples to illustrate controls, such as R v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Pfizer for procedural ultra vires.
- When discussing advantages, link to practical examples like road traffic regulations or health and safety rules to show real-world application.
- For top marks, compare the effectiveness of parliamentary and judicial controls, noting limitations of each, and reach a justified conclusion.
- Use the PEEEL structure (Point, Evidence, Explanation, Evaluation, Link) when evaluating the legislative process.
- For essays on influences, select two or three specific influences and examine them in depth with recent, named examples (e.g., the Snowdrop Campaign influencing the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997).
- When describing the legislative process, always mention the distinct paths for public bills, private members' bills, and private bills.
- In evaluation questions, directly address the criteria of effectiveness: democratic accountability, efficiency, accessibility, and responsiveness to public opinion.
Common Mistakes
- Confusing delegated legislation with primary legislation or secondary sources of law.
- Omitting judicial controls or failing to distinguish between procedural and substantive ultra vires.
- Assuming all delegated legislation undergoes the same level of parliamentary scrutiny, overlooking the variety of procedures.
- Overlooking the democratic deficit and not discussing the lack of public participation or effective consultation.
- Confusing the roles of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, particularly in the legislative process after the Parliament Acts.
- Believing that the monarch still actively exercises the royal prerogative to refuse royal assent.
Marking Points
- Accurate identification of three main types of delegated legislation with relevant examples.
- Clear explanation of the enabling Act and its constraints on delegated powers.
- Detailed analysis of negative and affirmative resolution procedures, including their limitations.
- Application of the ultra vires doctrine with case references (e.g., Aylesbury Mushrooms, R v Secretary of State ex parte Pfizer).
- Balanced evaluation of advantages and disadvantages, leading to a reasoned overall conclusion.
- Award credit for accurately sequencing the stages of a bill from first reading to royal assent, including the committee and report stages.
- Award credit for identifying at least two distinct influences on Parliament, such as pressure groups, the Law Commission, or manifesto commitments, with relevant examples.
- Award credit for explaining the impact of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 on the balance of power between the two Houses.
Overview of Law Making
Law Making is a foundational topic in the Cambridge OCR A-Level Law syllabus, exploring how laws are created in England and Wales. It covers two primary sources: parliamentary legislation (statute law) and judicial precedent (case law). Understanding this topic is crucial because it explains the mechanisms behind the laws that govern society, from Acts of Parliament to the doctrine of precedent. Students will examine the legislative process, including the stages a bill goes through to become an Act, as well as the roles of the House of Commons, House of Lords, and the monarch. Additionally, the topic delves into delegated legislation, where Parliament grants law-making powers to other bodies, and the controls over such powers.
The second major component is judicial precedent, which operates under the doctrine of stare decisis ('let the decision stand'). This involves the hierarchy of courts, binding precedent, and the ability of courts to distinguish, overrule, or reverse decisions. Students must grasp how judges interpret statutes using rules like the literal, golden, and mischief rules, as well as the purposive approach. This topic is vital because it shows how law evolves through both parliamentary sovereignty and judicial interpretation, balancing flexibility with certainty. Mastery of Law Making enables students to critically evaluate the effectiveness and fairness of the law-making process, a key skill for exam success and legal reasoning.
Law Making connects to other A-Level topics such as the English Legal System (e.g., court structure, legal personnel) and substantive law areas like criminal or tort law. It also underpins discussions on the rule of law, separation of powers, and parliamentary sovereignty. By understanding how laws are created and interpreted, students can better analyse case outcomes and statutory provisions in exams. This topic is assessed through both multiple-choice questions and essay-style responses, requiring students to demonstrate knowledge of procedures, principles, and criticisms. A strong grasp of Law Making is essential for achieving top marks in the OCR A-Level Law examination.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between an Act of Parliament and delegated legislation?
An Act of Parliament is primary legislation passed by the House of Commons, House of Lords, and given Royal Assent by the monarch. It is the highest form of law. Delegated legislation is law made by other bodies (e.g., government ministers, local authorities) under powers granted by an Act of Parliament. Examples include statutory instruments and by-laws. Delegated legislation is quicker and more flexible but lacks the same democratic scrutiny as primary legislation.
How does the doctrine of precedent work in English law?
The doctrine of precedent, or stare decisis, means that courts must follow decisions of higher courts in the same hierarchy. For example, the Supreme Court binds all lower courts, and the Court of Appeal binds the High Court. A precedent is binding if the facts are sufficiently similar and the decision was made by a superior court. Courts can distinguish a case if material facts differ, or overrule a precedent in a later case. This ensures consistency and predictability in law.
What are the main rules of statutory interpretation?
The main rules are: (1) The literal rule – giving words their plain ordinary meaning (e.g., Whitely v Chappell). (2) The golden rule – a modification of the literal rule to avoid absurdity (e.g., R v Allen). (3) The mischief rule – looking at the problem the Act was intended to remedy (e.g., Smith v Hughes). (4) The purposive approach – giving effect to the purpose of the Act, often used in EU law contexts. Each has strengths and weaknesses, and judges may use a combination.
Can the House of Lords reject a bill passed by the House of Commons?
The House of Lords can reject or amend bills, but its power is limited by the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949. If the Lords reject a bill that has been passed by the Commons in two successive sessions, the Commons can force it through without Lords' consent after one year. Money bills (e.g., taxation) can only be delayed by the Lords for one month. This ensures the elected Commons ultimately prevails.
What is the difference between binding and persuasive precedent?
Binding precedent must be followed by lower courts in the same hierarchy. For example, a High Court judge must follow a Court of Appeal decision. Persuasive precedent is not binding but may influence a judge's decision. Sources include decisions from lower courts, courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction, the Privy Council, and foreign courts. Persuasive precedents are often used when there is no binding authority or to support a particular interpretation.
Why is the mischief rule important in statutory interpretation?
The mischief rule is important because it allows judges to consider the problem or 'mischief' that the Act was designed to remedy, leading to a more purposive interpretation. It originated from Heydon's Case (1584) and is particularly useful when the literal meaning leads to an outcome that contradicts the Act's intention. For example, in Smith v Hughes (1960), the court used the mischief rule to interpret 'soliciting in a street' to include soliciting from a balcony, as the Act aimed to curb street prostitution.
← Back to Law Cambridge OCR A-Level Specification · All Law Topics