Home > Public Law
Public Law
- Sort by
- Mark
- Question
- Year
- Words
- Date submitted
Question: SOAS Public Law Coursework II 2010-11
You are required to give an opinion as to whether both the situations set out below would be amenable for a judicial review but you are not required to discuss the grounds of review.
(i) Val was a single mother with two children who was granted a tenancy in a two bed roomed maisonette owned by Singleton Council pursuant to the council’s duty to rehouse under the Homeless and Housing Act (fictional). After eighteen months the property was transferred to Hometrust, an independent housing association, set up by the council. Shortly afterwards, Val had a dispute with one of her neighbours which resulted in a heated exchange of words and a slamming of doors. This was reported and she was subject to a disciplinary procedure organised by Hometrust. Without being given the benefit of legal representation or a hearing she was found guilty and informed by Hometrust that her tenancy agreement would be terminated in six months time. This would mean that Val would be made homeless.
Advise Val whether she would be able use the judicial review procedure to argue that her rights under Article 6 and Article 8 of the ECHR have been breached.
(ii) Under the Ancient Monuments Act (fictitious) the Secretary of State has the power to list for preservation purposes important remains of archaeological or of historical interest. While digging the foundations of a new building for Globe Developments in the centre of Barchester, Ron discovers several well preserved pieces of Roman glass. The find is reported in the local and national TV, radio and press. Despite the growing interest in the find the Secretary of State has decided without giving any reasons not to list the site and Globe Developments will soon lay concrete foundations which would mean that the site would not be further excavated by archaeologists and preserved. Bill and Sachin are keen amateur archaeologists who live two hundred miles away in London. To further the wider preservation of antiquity they have set up the Roman Antiquities Foundation as a charity to promote the excavation and study of Roman remains.
Advise both the Roman Antiquities Foundation and Bill and Sachin as individuals whether they would be in a position to challenge the decision of the Secretary of State
under the judicial review procedure.
Note that this is not a question on the substantive grounds of review.
Both parts of the answer should not exceed 1200 words. Relevant case law must be referred to. The work should be referenced with footnotes and word processed in font size 12. The hand in deadline is Wednesday 2 March 2011.
Details: - Mark: 78% | Course: Public Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 1493 | References: Yes | Date written: February, 2011 | Date submitted: April 30, 2011 | Coursework ID: 682
Question: The regular introduction of public order legislation and the inexorable increase in police powers over the last fifteen years means that all public protest has potentially become criminal activity. Discuss.
Details: - Mark: 71% | Course: Public Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 3004 | References: Yes | Date written: February, 2008 | Date submitted: April 05, 2011 | Coursework ID: 663
Question: 'Successive British governments have maintained that human rights are already adequately protected by law in the United Kingdom. You have to look long and hard before you can detect any difference between the English common law and the principles set out in the Convention.' Assess the accuracy of this claim.
Details: - Mark: 70% | Course: Public Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 3691 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: October 21, 2008 | Coursework ID: 164
Question: Evaluate the extent to which the United Kingdom Parliament is sovereign. Consider both legal and political factors.
Details: - Mark: 68% | Course: Public Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 1884 | References: Yes | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: October 21, 2008 | Coursework ID: 178
Question: Judicial Review is concerned not with the decision but with the decision making process. Explain and evaluate this statement.
Details: - Mark: 67% | Course: Public Law | Year: 1st | Words: 2542 | References: Yes | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: September 29, 2008 | Coursework ID: 9
Question: ‘If the separation of powers was a reality in the British constitution, governmental and judicial arrangements would require major modification.’ Discuss.
Details: - Mark: 67% | Course: Public Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1379 | References: Yes | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: March 21, 2010 | Coursework ID: 598
Question: Assume that an official draft of a new, codified Constitution of the United Kingdom is complete, except for one matter. The drafters have to decide what to do about constitutional conventions.
Explain with reasons the main course of action open to them, and indicate which course you think would be best.
Details: - Mark: 67% | Course: Public Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 1310 | References: Yes | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: December 05, 2010 | Coursework ID: 626
Question: Should the House of Lords be fully elected? How would election of the House of Lords affect its relationship with the House of Commons?
Details: - Mark: 66% | Course: Public Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1954 | References: Yes | Date written: December, 2004 | Date submitted: October 21, 2008 | Coursework ID: 169
Question: ‘Any proposal for the reform of the composition of the House of Lords ought logically to begin by asking what it is we expect the House of Lords to do and to tailor composition to function.’ Discuss, giving an account of the existing forms of public business conducted by the House of Lords.
Details: - Mark: 66% | Course: Public Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1484 | References: Yes | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: April 09, 2009 | Coursework ID: 599
Question: Evaluate the changes that have occurred to the structure of the legal profession over the last ten years in Britain and develop an argument for the future fusion of solicitors and barristers.
Details: - Mark: 65% | Course: Public Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 2055 | References: Yes | Date written: March, 1999 | Date submitted: October 21, 2008 | Coursework ID: 163
