THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES UNIT 12 PUBLIC LAW *

Transcription

1 15 January 2016 Level 6 PUBLIC LAW Subject Code L6-12 THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES UNIT 12 PUBLIC LAW * Time allowed: 3 hours plus 15 minutes reading time Instructions to Candidates You have FIFTEEN minutes to read through this question paper before the start of the examination. It is strongly recommended that you use the reading time to read this question paper fully. However, you may make notes on this question paper or in your answer booklet during this time, if you wish. All questions carry 25 marks. Answer FOUR only of the following EIGHT questions. This question paper is divided into TWO sections. You MUST answer at least ONE question from Section A and at least ONE question from Section B. Write in full sentences a yes or no answer will earn no marks. Candidates may use in the examination their own unmarked copy of the designated statute book: Blackstone s Statutes on Public Law and Human Rights , 25th edition, Robert G Lee, Oxford University Press, Candidates must comply with the CILEx Examination Regulations. Full reasoning must be shown in answers. Statutory authorities, decided cases and examples should be used where appropriate. Information for Candidates The mark allocation for each question and part-question is given and you are advised to take this into account in planning your work. Write in blue or black ink or ballpoint pen. Attention should be paid to clear, neat handwriting and tidy alterations. Complete all rough work in your answer booklet. Cross through any work you do not want marked. Do not turn over this page until instructed by the Invigilator. * This unit is a component of the following CILEx qualifications: LEVEL 6 CERTIFICATE IN LAW, LEVEL 6 PROFESSIONAL HIGHER DIPLOMA IN LAW AND PRACTICE and the LEVEL 6 DIPLOMA IN LEGAL PRACTICE Page 1 of 8

2 BLANK PAGE Page 2 of 8

3 SECTION A (Answer at least one question from this section) 1. let us not fool ourselves. In our constitutional arrangements, we do not have separation of powers, at any rate in the sense that it is understood elsewhere The executive and the legislature are not and never have been separate. The Rt Hon. Lord Judge, Constitutional Change: Unfinished Business, Lecture delivered at University College London on 4 December (a) Analyse the importance or otherwise of ensuring the separation of powers in a political system. (6 marks) (b) Critically evaluate the extent to which Lord Judge accurately describes the extent of separation of powers in the UK. (19 marks) (Total: 25 marks) 2. Evaluate the effectiveness of the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 in safeguarding human rights in the United Kingdom. (25 marks) 3. (a) Critically analyse the defences on which the government can rely in defending a claim for breach of a commercial contract. (13 marks) (b) Critically analyse the circumstances in which a government department can apply to withhold evidence in civil proceedings to which it is a party. (12 marks) (Total: 25 marks) 4. Evaluate the extent to which the law on defamation protects the freedom of the press. (25 marks) Turn over Page 3 of 8

4 SECTION B (Answer at least one question from this section) Question 1 The Extension of Franchise Act 2013 ( the EFA 2013 ) (fictitious) granted the right to vote to 16 and 17 year olds in all elections in England and Wales apart from parliamentary elections. The EFA 2013 contains a provision stating that the extension of the franchise in this way shall be a permanent feature of the United Kingdom s constitutional arrangements. Recently, following a change of government, Parliament passed the Mayoral Elections Act 2015 ( the MEA 2015 ) (fictitious). The MEA 2015 contains provisions requiring certain towns in England and Wales, including Bellville, to hold elections for directly elected mayors. Although the MEA 2015 contains no reference to the EFA 2013, it provides that voters must be aged 18 and over to be able to vote. As the House of Lords was opposed to the MEA 2015, it was passed by the House of Commons invoking the procedure specified by the Parliament Acts 1911 and Abigail, aged 17, applied to be entered on the electoral register for the mayoral election shortly due to take place in Bellville. Her application has been rejected on the grounds that she is not yet 18. Advise Abigail whether she has any grounds for relying on the EFA 2013 in order to challenge the rejection of her application to be entered on the electoral register. (25 marks) Page 4 of 8

5 Question 2 Following concern about the diseases affecting native British trees, Parliament has enacted the Protection of Nature Act 2015 ( the Act ) (fictitious) setting up the UK Woodlands Agency ( the Agency ). The Act grants the Agency the power to award research grants to registered charities which are carrying out research into diseases affecting native British trees. The Agency has published guidelines stating that grants will normally be awarded to registered charities that have been carrying out research for at least five years into diseases affecting trees and produce a research proposal supported by the Economic and Environmental Research Council ( EERC ) (fictitious). (i) (ii) (iii) ForestPlant UK applied for a grant. As it fulfilled all the conditions in the Agency s guidelines, it was surprised when its application was rejected. In its letter of rejection the Agency stated that the reason for rejecting the application was that ForestPlant UK had failed to show that its research would help to combat climate change. Ash Life applied for a grant. It produced a research proposal supported by Wessex University s Forestry Centre, whose expertise in tree diseases is internationally recognised. It received a letter of rejection from the Agency, advising it that its application had been rejected as its proposal had not been supported by the EERC. Tropical Trees Ltd was awarded a grant, although it is not a registered charity and its research proposal covered exotic Caribbean tree species. Ecological Forests International ( EFI ), a pressure group campaigning worldwide for the preservation of native forests, wrote to the Agency querying the decision. The Agency replied four months later that the Act merely contained guidelines which were not binding on the Agency. Advise ForestPlant UK, Ash Life and EFI whether each may make a claim for judicial review. (25 marks) Page 5 of 8 Turn over

6 Question 3 (a) David is the leader of a pressure group, the Read Mark Learn Coalition ( RMLC ), campaigning against plans by the Bellville District Council to close three libraries in the locality. It plans to hold a protest march along Bellville High Street. David gives six clear days notice of the proposed date and route of the march to the police, by handing in a notice at Bellville Police Station. The marchers are planning to march past the offices of the Action Party (fictitious), the ruling party on the Bellville District Council, as the Action Party supports the proposed closures. The Chief Constable for the Bellville area serves a notice prohibiting the march from going past the Action Party s offices. The RMLC abides by the Chief Constable s notice and the march takes place peacefully. At the end of the march, about 150 protestors gather on the Town Square for a public meeting. David begins to address the protestors, when Inspector Sharma calls David over to talk to him. While David is speaking to Inspector Sharma, the other protestors start to shout anti-action Party slogans. Sergeant Morgan, another police officer present, shouts to them: I ll give you 15 minutes and then you must go. I don t want your gathering blocking the Town Square all day and disturbing shoppers. Consider the legality of the actions taken by the Chief Constable and Sergeant Morgan. (11 marks) (b) The protestors disperse peacefully and a small group of them go back to David s house to discuss the day s events. They have a lot to drink and David starts shouting slogans abusing certain Action Party leaders by name. One of the Action Party s leaders, Jack, who to David s knowledge lives next door, calls the police. PC Brodie knocks on David s front door and David lets him in. PC Brodie warns David to stop using bad language, otherwise he will be arrested under s.4 Public Order Act 1986 for using abusive language. David tells him: Get out and get lost! PC Brodie then tells David he is under arrest for behaving like a hooligan. Adebayo, another RMLC member, stands in the doorway, refusing to allow PC Brodie to take David away. PC Brodie summons back-up; PC Roberts arrives and arrests Adebayo for obstructing a police officer. Advise: (i) David whether he was lawfully arrested; (6 marks) (ii) David and Adebayo whether they are guilty of any offence. (8 marks) (Total: 25 marks) Page 6 of 8

7 Question 4 (a) As a result of concern about a drop in the number of older people being vaccinated against flu, Parliament has enacted the Influenza Prevention Act 2015 ( the Act ) (fictitious). Section 2(1) of the Act makes it a criminal offence to promote theories that vaccinations against influenza are ineffective. Conviction of an offence under s.2(1) carries a penalty of up to two years imprisonment and/or a fine of 5,000. Dr Zoe Reynolds is a medical doctor who believes that vaccinations against influenza are ineffective and potentially harmful to children. At a lecture to final-year medical students at Molteno University s School of Medicine, one of the UK s leading medical schools, Zoe presents a paper in which she argues that there is credible scientific evidence to support her views. After presenting the paper, Zoe is arrested and charged with an offence under s.2(1) of the Act. Advise Zoe whether she has any grounds for arguing that her prosecution constitutes an unjustified interference with her rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. (15 marks) (b) The prosecution of Zoe goes ahead, and the following editorial appears in The Sentinel, a national newspaper, on the opening day of her trial taking place in the Birmingham Crown Court. Flu: Still a Peril! Despite the government s best efforts, the take-up of the flu vaccine remains disappointingly low. The Crown Prosecution Service s efforts to prosecute ill-informed pedlars of fairy tales about the ineffectiveness of the flu vaccine are very welcome. Drastic action is needed to protect older people from the perils of flu. Consider whether The Sentinel may incur criminal liability under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 as a result of the comments made in its editorial. (10 marks) (Total: 25 marks) End of Examination Paper 2016 The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives Page 7 of 8

8 BLANK PAGE Page 8 of 8