p.p1 {font-kerning: none} span.s2 {font-kerning: none; color:

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px ‘Helvetica Neue’; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px ‘Helvetica Neue’; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 12.0px}
span.s1 {font-kerning: none}
span.s2 {font-kerning: none; color: #ff2600; -webkit-text-stroke: 0px #ff2600}

The question of a perfect free world is discuss in Politics. In a democracy, the laws should be made by elected representatives of society. In the United Kingdom this means that major laws are made by Parliament. Parliament consists of the House of Commons and the House of Lords. This essay will evaluate both the process of parliamentary law-making and the doctrine of judicial precedent. 

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Statutes are made by Parliament, which consists of the House of Commons, the House of Lords and the Monarch. Laws passed by Parliament are knows as Acts of Parliament. Under the normal procedure both Houses must vote in labour of a bill before it can become a new Act of Parliament. In Britain, Parliament is sovereign, which has traditionally meant that the law it makes takes precedence over law originating from any other source through. 

There is several advantages in favor of the parliamentary law-making. The main advantage of parliamentary law-making is that it is made by our elected representatives. This means it is democratic. (BESOIN DUN CONNECTEURS) The people who sit in the House of Commons are referred to as Members of Parliament (MPs) who are elected by the public. Under the fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 there must be a general election every five years. This means that the public can vote out any government If it has not performed as the public expected. 

However, the members of the House of Lords are not elected by the general public, instead the majority are appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of the House of Lords Appointments Commission. Although the power of the House of Commons are limited by the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, the unelected House of Lords can still delay important for up to a year. The House of Lords currently has over 800 members, divided into four different types such as : life peers, retired judges of the former House of Lords’ judicial committee, bishops and elected hereditary peers. 

This argument show that the parliamentary law-making can not be totally democratic. 

Another advantage is that Acts of Parliament can reform whole areas of law in the one Act. An example is in the criminal law with the Fraud Act 2006 which abolished all the old offenses of deception and fraud and created a newer and, hopefully, simpler structures of offenses. Judges can only change the law on very small areas of law as they can only rule on the point of law in the case there deciding. 

Acts of Parliament can also set broad policies and give the power to others to make detailed regulations. This is known as delegated legislation. This is an advantage because the general structure is laid down by Parliament but it allows greater detail in the law than if it was just contained in an Act of Parliament. 

Also before the parliamentary legislative process begins, usually a policy objective will have been identified by the Government of the day. This policy objective may have been set out in an election manifesto or included in an official consultation document, known as a Green Pepper. The latter document puts forward tentative proposals, which interested parties may consider and give their views on. The Green Pepper will be followed by a White Paper, which contains the specific reform plans, The Government’s legislative plans for a parliamentary session are outlined in the Queen’s Speech in May. 

All statutes begin as a Bill, which is a proposal for a piece of legislation. There three different types of Bill : First the Public Bill, which are written by parliamentary counsel who specialize in drafting legislation. The second types of Bill is the Private Member’s Bills which are prepared by an individual backbencher MP. Then, the last type of Bill is the Private Bills, which are usually proposed by a local authority, public corporation or large public company and usually only affect that sponsor. An example might be a local authority seeking the right to build a bridge or road. 

An another advantage is that the legislative process is very thorough; there are three readings and two stages, which are repeated in the Commons and the Lords. This is provides plenty of opportunity to debate, scrutinize and amend laws, to minimize the risk of mistakes. 

First, the title of the prepared Bill is read to the House of Commons, which is called the first reading and acts as a notification of proposed measure. Then, at the second reading, the proposals are debated fully and may be amended, and members vote on whether the legislation should proceed. The third stages is that the Bill is referred to a committee of the House of Commons for detailed examination, bearing in mind the point made during the debate. During the third reading, the Bill is represented to the House. There may be a short debate, and a vote on whether to accept or reject the legislation as it stands. 

The Bill then goes to the House of Lords, where it goes through a similar process of three readings. If the House of Lords alters anything, the Bill returns to the Commons for further proposals for alternative changes. At one time legislation could not be passed without the agreements of both Houses, which meant that the unelected House of Lords could block legislation put forward by the elected House of Commons. 

This allows the government to take into consideration objections to the proposals. Also, as all Bill have to through the lengthy process in both Houses of Parliament, the new law will be thoroughly discussed in Parliament. 

However, the Parliament does not always have time to deal with all the reforms that are proposed. This is particularly true of reforms of ‘lawyers’law’ such as criminal law or the law of contract. An example of law that is still awaiting reform is the law on assaults and other offenses against the person. The Law Commission proposed changes to the law on offenses against the person in 1993. Reform was needed because the old law dated back to an Act of 1861 which was very difficult to understand. In 1997 the government accepted that there was a need for reform and published a draft Bill in 1998. However, this was not put before Parliament and the law has not yet been reformed. 

Even where the Government introduces a Bill into Parliament the process of becoming an Act with all the different reading, committee and report stages can take several months. 

The Government is in control of the Parliamentary timetable and allows very little time for private members’ Bill. Even when a private member does manage to introduce a Bill, it can be easily voted out by the government as they result is that very few private member’s Bills becomes laws. 

Another disadvantage is that Acts of Parliament are often very long and complex. This can make them difficult to understand. In fact, many of the cases that go to the House of Lords on appeals are about what the words in an Act of Parliament mean. The law can become even more complicated where one Act amends another so that it is necessary to consult two or more Acts to find out exactly what the law is. 


Precedent is subordinate to statute law, delegated legislation and European regulations. This means that if, for example, an Act of Parliament is passed, and that Act contains a provision which contradicts a previously decided case, that case decision will cease to have effect; the Act of Parliament is now the law on that point. This happened when Parliament passed the Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act in 1996. Up to then judicial decisions meant that a person could 

only be charged with murder and manslaughter if the victim died within a year and a day of receiving his injuries. The Act enacted that there was no time limit, and a person could be guilty even if the victim died several years later, so cases after 1996 follow the Act and not the old judicial decisions. 

Judicial precedent is a source of law where past decisions of the judges create law for future judges to follow. In other words, precedent is where the courts follow the decisions of previous cases, particularly the decisions of the higher courts. Also know as case law and is still a majo source of law.

The judicial precedent is important because some areas of law are hardly based on parliamentary or statutory law. Therefore, much of contract and tort law is based on judicial precedent (common law). So, you need to understand how it works. For example, the offense of murder was defined by Lord Edward Coke.

‘Stare decisis et non quieta movere’ which means ‘stand by what has been decided and do not unsettle established. Therefore precede is ‘standing by’ or following the decisions made in previous cases. Similar cases should be treated in the same way. Where the point of law in the previous case the court hearing the present case should follow the previous decision. 


As can be seen from the previous sections there are both advantages and disadvantages to the way in which judicial precedent operates in England and Wales. In fact it could be said that evert advantage has a corresponding disadvantage. 

The main advantages are firstly certainty because the courts follow past decisions people know what the law is and how it is likely to be applied in their case; it allows lawyers to advise clients on the likely outcome of cases; it also allows people to operate their business knowing that financial and other arrangements they make are recognized by law. The House of Lords Practice Statements points out how important certainty is.  Secondly, consistency and fairness in the law which it is seen as just and fair that similar cases should be decided in a similar way, just as in any sport it is seen as fair that the rules of the fame apply equally to each side. The law must be consistent if it is to be credible. Thirdly, precision as the principles of law are set out in actual cases the law becomes very precise; it is well illustrated and gradually builds up through the different variations of facts in the cases that come before the courts.