Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
:smiley:Law Commission (LC) (Advantages of LC (Consolidation +…
:smiley:Law Commission (LC)
Aims : Fair, simple, modern and cost effective
basic Info about LC
currently LC has budget of £2.23 million and is still currently decreasing
Causing less staff members and limit their areas of reform
LC has 5 commissioners
Other 4 commissioners have profession such as a layer, judge, or legal academics (up to 5 years)
The head is the chairman (In high court or CoA Judge (apply by LC up to 3 years)
Each of these has a head
e.g. Criminal law and public law teams
LC established under the Law Reform Act 1965 = 'keep under review all law in England and Wales with a view to its systematic development and reform'
Law Commission Act 2009 introduced with a new fast track procedure for LC bills in HOL. Need to consider if they have 'serious intentions' for reform- particular areas
LC are independent therefore they can choose which report to review on but in 2009 LC now has to also go and ask if Government ministers would likely look at the review or not
It is questionable to whether LC is independent or not (appointed by Gov and has to ask Gov Ministers if they would likely review it and also how there power is just being used)
Government ministers can ask LC to review part of law
e.g. 2017 - asked look at money laundering + Abbusive and Online communications
LC is an independent, full time, statutory Law reform body
(sponsored by MoJ (Ministry of Justice - principles of justice and supported by 33 agencies and public bodies)
Following public consultation, LC decides on Programme of law
currently 2018 (13th Programme)
13th (reviewed 14) include looking at reforms of surrogacy, automated vehicles and residential leashhold
2017 (12th programme) looked at law of fire arms - Policing and Crime Act 2017
Well considered and good expertise
Review process
1)Scoping paper (produce consultation document) - set out current law + proposals
invite consultation (for further discussion of the document)
2) final paper followed by draft bill (Ready for P if GM agreed (e.g. Home secretary accepts proposal)
Have to be included in a Q about LC to get a L4
As well as reform LC can also recommend:
Codification and consolidation of law
Both means bringing the law together to make it more accessible
Codification = arranging the law of a particular subject together into one place making it more accessible when finding it
E.g.The Proposal Sentencing Code. Currently in multiple Acts, there is over 1,300 pages of law
Consolidation = where law are brought together in one place and then LC would remove laws that are no longer needed or simplify the law to make it more accessible
1965-2006 LC was responsible for 220 consolidation Acts. Only 2 have been produced including the charities Act 2011
LC is the vital role in law reform
There was 8% budget cut but there was positive impact - 66% success rated also LC is in high regards (respected)
Advantages of LC
Expertise
widely respected because of their expertise (LC copied throughout world - new Zealand / Canada / Australia)
5 law commissions and each have a legal profession
High rate of success
1965 - LC published over 220 law reform reports
Approx 2/3 led to reform (full or part)
E.g. Law reform act 1996 - reviewed the year and day rule -followed by the reform of the Double Jeopardy Act allowing re-trial of the same crime (introduced in Criminal Justice Act 2003) -Dunlop is the 1st person who was trialed for the same crime
Success in repealing obsolete and unnecessary statutes
Take away powers of Acts of P when it is not needed therefore making law more accessible
1965 - 19 repealed over 3,000
E.g. The Statute of Law Repeal Act 2013 - repealed over 800 Act of P
Consolidation + codification
1965-2006 LC was responsible for 220 consolidation Acts. Only 2 have been produced including the charities Act 2011
E.g. Education Act 1996 (brought all laws about education together in one place)
Consolidation is no longer a priority
Codification still promoted
reform brings together over 1,300 pages of law
Independence from government
Non- political therefore a dedicated full - time reform body
Can choose which aspects of law to review and can consider to review governments proposal of law
Dedicated full time law review body + thorough process
Scoping paper (produce consultation document) - set out current law + proposals & invite consultation (for further discussion of the document)
final paper followed by draft bill (Ready for P if GM agreed (e.g. Home secretary accepts proposal)
Public consultation therefore see more experts (more time than P)
Improved procedures
Law Commission Act 2009 places obligation on Minister for Justice to produce an annual report indicating the steps Gov takes to implement LC reports within 6 months and a full response (whether reject or not) within 12 months
New protocol between Gov and LC - increase in LC reports
Introduced fast track procedure for implementing non-controversial (no big disagreement - argument) law reforms
Act introduced a 'carry over' procedure where a bill introduced into P in 1 year then if it was not looked at then it can be reviewed in the following year (not normally possible as P law is normally reviewed in the same year)
Disadvantages of LC
Reviewing law is a Slow process (take several years)
Has small staff and limited budget - limit areas of law LC can look at
Critics argue that if there was more staff and a larger budget then LC can do more
Budget = currently £2.23 million
Equates to 53% reduction across the 4 years period to March 2020 and a 53% reduction overall since 2010-11
There's often delays in implementing LC reports
Gov don't always prioritize law reform as they have other priorities
E.g.EU withdrawal and these take procedures over law reform proposals
10 years (1990-2000) - particularly unproductive - implementing reform of criminal law ('lost decade of law reform' by critics)
If Gov accept proposal (it may not necessarily reflect LC) as they go through PL
New fast track procedure was introduced for non-controversial LC bills in HOL (procedure isn't used often)
Gov would only implement reforms that they think would be popular with voters (5 year)
1/3 not reformed
E.g. Homicide 2006
Not implemented therefore meant there was radical changes to current structure of murder , manslaughter etc
Therefore report restructured murder into 2 types (1st and 2nd) - 1st = minimal life sentence. 2nd degree = maximum life sentence-never minimal
However new protocols introduced in Law Commission Act 2009 may have improved their prospects of success as now the Gov Ministers must indicate if they are genuinely interested in the reform of a specific area of reform
Gov not obliged to consult with LC before implementing new law reforms
Gov might decide to make new laws that is needed or reform existing laws and that the Gov doesn't need to go through LC therefore meaning the valuable expertise of LC is not used and is wasted
limited success in codification
Codification = bringing together whole area of law into 1 statute/code to make it more accessible
Original plan was to codify them but then it was seen as too great of an task due to the amount of law there is and also how it occupies too much Parliamentary time
Current plan = reform specific areas of criminal law and target those in most urgent need of reform