L3 UNIT 7: Discrimination Law

Exercise 1 p. 76 : Complete the following sentence 

1. Discrimination means the fact of discriminating against another individual, in the 

provision of public services or in the workplace, on grounds of sex, gender 

reassignment, etc. 

2. Since the Equality Act, pregnant mothers have been protected by the law when 

breasfeeding in public places. 

3. Whereas religion is a protected characteristic, which corresponds to a set number of 

established religions, belief has a much wider scope and can encompass some 

very unconventional practices. 

4. Contrary to the Human Rights Act, the Equality Act allows a much wider range of 

behaviours to be protected. 

L2 UNIT 5: The Prime Minister and the Cabinet, Homework for week 9

Here's the homework for next week that will be dedicated to The Prime Minister and the Cabinet:

1. Study the introduction... by rote! (an oral or written quiz is likely to take place sometime during the tutorial)

2. Make sure that you know all the vocabulary of Unit 4, 5 and 6...

3. Complete the grammar exercise on Modals p. 52-53. (Go over "modal verbs" in a grammar book if necessary.)

4. Watch to the following BBC video (click on the link below) and answer the questions of exercise 3 p. 52.

Reshuffle: Government and Labour make changes

Good luck!

L3 UNIT 5: Family Law, Corrections of exercises 1 & 2 p. 56

Exercise 1 : 

1- In order for couple to divorce, the two parties have to prove to the judge that their 

marriage is over by using one of the five set grounds for divorce. 

2- Although surrogacy is legalised in England and Wales, this type of arrangement cannot 

be a commercial one and is not binding on the parties. 

3- Unlike married couples who have rights and duties towards each other, cohabitants are 

not protected by the law, except in cases of domestic violence. 

4- Parenthood is determined either genetically or by a court decision in cases of adoption. 

Exercise 2: 

The Government has announced plans to introduce new legislation that explicitly makes clear that 

children should have an ongoing relationship with both their parents after separation, where that is 

safe and in the child's best interests 

The Children Act 1989 sets out the clear principle that a child's welfare is always paramount in 

any family court decision about their future. However, Ministers argue that the benefit of ongoing 

involvement with both parents is not explicitly stated in law even though it is factored into 

decisions. 

The Government would like to amend section 1 of the Children Act 1989 to require the court to 

"work on the presumption that a child's welfare is likely to be furthered through safe involvement 

with both parents - unless the evidence shows this not to be safe or in the child’s best interests.[…] 

The proposals are likely to make little practical difference to what currently happens in family 

courts and make clear that any change is not about equality in time that a child spends with each 

parent after separation. They state explicitly, there is no intention that equal time or any prescribed 

notion of an ‘appropriate' division of time, should be the starting point of a court's consideration. 

The consultation also asks how to toughen sanctions to enforce breaches of court orders regarding 

care arrangements - including, where there is a wilful refusal to comply with the court, short-term 

punitive action to protect the longer-term interests of the child. The existing sanctions of a fine or 

imprisonment for contempt of court, or an order to undertake unpaid work, are not often used. 

The proposals were first proposed in February - as part of the Government's response to the 

independent Family Justice Review Panel. The consultation closes on Wednesday 5 September 

2012. 

L2 UK PArliament: text n° 3 p. 62-63 by Colin Low

Lords reform: the Lords is more diverse and more democratic than the Commons

Colin Low, the author of the article, is a member of the House of Lords.

In Colin Low’s view, although the Lords[1] is not democratically elected, it is more representative of society than the Commons /

Or:

According to C. Low, despite the fact that the Lords is not democratically elected, the Upper Chamber proves to be more representative of a cross-section of society than the Commons.

Indeed, C. Low contends, ethnic minorities as well as disabled people or women are all represented in greater proportion in the Lords.

Not only are women better represented, but they hold key (/ prominent) positions in the House.

Or:

Not only are women better represented, but they also are entrusted with key positions.[2]

Besides, the fact that Peers are not elected makes them more immune from political pressure.

Or:

Another argument is that precisely because peers are not elected, they are less subject to political pressure from party leaders (/ party heads / party “big wigs”[3]) and from political strategies (/ political manoeuvres / party politics / politicking).

On account of its diversity and also because it is much less partisan than the Commons, the Lords is generally more inclined to respond to the concerns of the specific groups they represent

Or:

On account of its diversity and also because it is much less partisan than the Commons, the Lords tends to be much more receptive to the needs of society).

At first sight, Colin Low’s argument seems quite compelling. His point seems all the more convincing that the First-past-the-post system that makes it possible for an MP to represent a constituency without winning an absolute majority of votes, which is also questionable from a democratic point of view.

The Liberal Democrats who are quite under-represented in comparison with the popular support they enjoy across the UK have long campaigned for the adoption of a more proportional system.

Nonetheless, one may object to Colin Low’s theory that the appointment of members of the upper house is quite political.

Since Life Peers are appointed on the advice of the Prime Minister, the make up (composition) of Second Chamber is to some extent determined by the majority party in the lower house. (By convention the Leader of the Opposition and other party leaders can propose a certain number.)

Note lastly that there is a tendency towards the inflation of the number of Life Peers as each Prime Minister is tempted to appoint to new peers sharing his political leanings. There is no fixed number of Life Peers. Over the last decades, Conservative Prime Ministers have created on average 20 life peers per year in office, and Labour Prime Ministers an average of 27.2 per year.

---

[1] i.e. the House of Lords

[2] NB: Not only (just like “never” or “neither”) at the beginning of a sentence is followed by the following structure:

Auxiliary + Subject + verb ê Are women represented (Passive Structure))

[3] Note that this expression is quite informal.

L3 UNIT 5: SURROGACY in the UK

Woman's Hour, BBC 4 radio programme (03/0/2011)

L3 UNIT 5: Family Law

Radmacher v Granatino (Appellant) [2010]

p. 59-61

Summary:

The facts concern the breakdown of a marriage between a German lady (whose maiden name was Radmacher) and a French banker (called Granatino) in London in 1998.

Probably on account of the fact that the amount of money at stake was quite substantial (but also because the case involved a mixed couple and finally because the situation was that of a defended divorce) the case was heard in first instance by the High Court.

Given that the petitioner had not taken legal advice before signing the pre-nuptial agreement and that he had then left banking to take up his studies in Oxford at the time of the divorce, the High Court judge chose to modify the terms of the pre-nuptial agreement entered into by the parties, granting the petitioner (Granatino) enough money to purchase a house in addition to a comfortable annual income.

Mrs Radmacher then appealed the High Court decision to the Court of Appeal, which reversed the trial court decision and held that the pre-nuptial agreement, although entered into in Germany, should have been given its full force.

In turn, Mr Granatino appealed the Court of Appeal’s decision but his appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court, (which upheld the Court of Appeal’s finding).

Lady Hale: Dissents with the majority opinion on 2 grounds:

A. Definition of marriage:

Lady Hale contends that marriage is both a contract and a status, meaning that the parties are not entirely free to determine the full terms of the contract, but that these terms are instead determined by the law of the land. She also considers that modern forms of marriage give the parties a lot of leeway but do not allow them to neglect their fundamental duty to support one another and their children.

B. A gender issue:

1. The object of a pre-nuptial agreement being for one or both parties to protect their assets, one may agree with Lady Hale that the idea of the agreement would be to deny the weaker spouse 50% of the couple’s assets in case of divorce. This is debatable as more and more people now have careers but it appears that there is a gender issue because – although this is not the case in Radmacher v Gratanino – pre-nuptial agreements benefit the rich which statistically tend to be male. (See The Guardian’s article: “Prenup Agreement enforced under UK law”)

L3 UNIT 4: Civil Courts of England and Wales

Exercise 2: p. 46

Text 1: Flood (Respondent) v Times Newspapers Limited (Appellant) [2012] UKSC 11

The matter at hand is a case of libel involving the publisher of The Times and a Detective Sergeant with the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Extradition Unit.

(Note that libel cases are tried by jury.)

In response to allegations by the publisher of The Times (in an article) that he may have taken advantage of his position as Detective Sergeant to disclose confidential extradition information to a security firm (a third party) in exchange for money, the (aforementioned) Police Officer (i.e. the claimant) brought / issued a claim for libel (against the journalist, i.e. the respondent).

In first instance the High Court (in all likelihood the Queen’s Bench Division) found that the journalist was justified in publishing his article pursuant to the Reynolds privilege which protects journalists whenever the public interest is at stake.

The Police Officer appealed the High Court’s decision to the Court of Appeal, which reversed the High Court’s finding.

In turn, the Journalist (being at this stage of the procedure “the appellant”) petitioned the Supreme Court which unanimously allowed the appeal.

Holding that the journalist was indeed allowed to base his defence on the Reynolds privilege (/to resort to the Reynolds privilege for his defence), reversed the Court of Appeal’s decision.

Preliminary issue (preliminary point of law): In civil proceedings, an issue ordered to be tried before the main trial of the case. An order for the trial of a preliminary issue may be made by the court if the preliminary issue (which may be a question of law) will be decisive or potentially decisive in the case. (Under Part 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules the court has the power to dismiss or give judgement on a claim after a decision on a preliminary issue)

Text 3: The Rugby Football Union (Respondent) v Consolidated Information Services Limited (Formerly Viagogo Limited)

This case concerning a breach of contract involves the RFU and Viagogo Limited (i.e. the litigants).

In order to enhance its popularity, the Rugby Football Union allocates tickets to clubs, schools, or referee societies which in turn sell those tickets to their members and to the public.

The terms of the contract specify that the tickets remain at all times the property of the RFU and that clubs are only entitled to resell these tickets at face value.  

Such clubs resort to ticket re-sale websites, such as Viagogo, enabling buyers to purchase those tickets, in return for a cut (a percentage) of the price of the ticket.

It came to the attention of the RFU, however, that certain tickets were sold at a price exceeding by a large amount the original price of the ticket.

As Viagogo refused to disclose the identity of sellers using its website, the RFU (the claimant) brought a claim against Viagogo (issued proceedings against Viagogo – the respondent) to protect its policy in relation to tickets.

Given the considerable amount of money at stake, the case in first instance was heard by the High Court.

The Court found that, the RFU was entitled to know the identity of the sellers having committed a breach of contract so it could obtain redress and consequently granted an order (Norwich Pharmacal order) demanding that Viagogo disclose / reveal the identity of such sellers.

On appeal Viagogo claimed that the order issued by the High Court represented a disproportionate infringement on the rights of potential wrongdoers (i.e. the clubs which used the website) as protected by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which guarantees the protection of personal data.

The Court of Appeal (civil division) upheld the High Court decision. It found that there being no other way for the RFU to have access to the identity of wrongdoers to obtain redress, the High Court Norwich Pharmacal order was justified and that the interference with the personal data rights of sellers was proportionate to the claim of the RFU.

Viagogo then petitioned the Supreme Court, which unanimously dismissed the appeal. 

Exercise 1 (p. 42) : 

Complete the following sentences. Write only one sentence

1- While a civil action encompasses any dispute raised between a claimant against a defendant, 

criminal actions are launched by the Crown Prosecution Service which prosecutes one or 

several defendants for an alleged criminal offence. 

2- Unlike slander which is made orally, libel is construed as a permanent form of defamation, 

whether it be written in the press and on a website or expressed in works of art. 

3- Divisional courts have appellate jurisdictions over cases heard in county courts, and 

sometimes magistrates’ courts, and are present in each of the three branches of the High 

Court of Justice. 

4- In order to avoid a trial, parties to a civil litigation are usually strongly advised to settle their 

disputes through ADR or arbitration. 

5- Multi-track cases refer to complex cases which are usually allocated to the High Court of 

Justice. 

Grammar (p. 50-51):

1-Complete the following phrases with the right preposition: 

1- To be liable FOR something 

2- To claim damages FOR something 

3- To entitled TO compensation 

4- To bring a case AGAINST someone

5- To fine someone FOR something 

6- To sue FOR an injunction 

2- Find the missing prepositions in the following text: 

Inside justice: London Rent Assessment Panel 

Samir Jeraj observes an independent panel settle private rental disputes, including a rare case of a flat with 

'fair rent' controls. Guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 30 October 2012 16.11 GMT 

I arrive at the London Rent Assessment Panel near Goodge Street for a 9:30am hearing. [...] One of 

five Rent Assessment Panels in England, the quasi-judicial body aims to settle disputes between 

private landlords and tenants in London. The hearing room itself is intimate setting with two 

panellists and the involved parties sitting at tables. 

The first case is from a tenant contesting a rise in her current rent, which is just over £600 per 

month for a two-bed flat near Goodge Street. Like much of the property in the area, the lower floors 

have been shops and workshops, with the top floor remaining as a flat for some exhausted Victorian 

or Edwardian shopkeeper to retire to. The landlord, a large property company, gives some 

background. They purchased the whole building a few years ago and with it came the tenant who 

was entitled to stay under the law. The landlord wants to upgrade the flat - the rest of the building 

has been refurbished and they claim the the flat is "very dated". The somewhat unknown condition 

of the flat's interior is the key to deciding how much the rent can be raised. 

The tenant, an articulate woman in her early 40s, gives her own version of the recent history. The 

flat goes back to her uncle, a man who became the tenant there in 1965 when there was still a small 

factory downstairs. She moved in with him and, when he passed away, took on the tenancy herself. 

According to her, the flat has no central heating or fitted kitchen, and the windows and gutters are 

also in a poor condition. […] 

The last hearing is […] one of a dying breed, a historical aberration. The one bed flat is still 

protected by the 1977 Rent Act, one of maybe 100,000 in the UK that operate the rent controls 

subsequently abolished in 1988. Under this Act, rents can only rise by an amount liked to the retail 

price index, what's termed "Fair Rent". Unfortunately, the tenant hasn't turned up, so the panel 

proceeds with the landlord's case. The one-bed flat is in St John's Wood, where a comparable flat 

would be rented out for £24,000 a year. Just nearby on Abbey Road, a similar flat was being 

advertised at £23,900. […] The tenants and landlords will receive a decision notice within 28 days. 

The hearings are over by lunchtime, which means the committee can carry out their visits in the 

afternoon, and decide what the rent should be.

L2 UNIT 3: Britain's Uncodified Constitution

Reading Comprehension (p. 22) :

A written constitution for the UK is ‘inevitable’, says First Minister Carwyn Jones

D. Read the article and answer the following questions:

1. Explain the term in the article ‘multiple centres of democratic accountability’.

The transfer of certain limited powers from the UK parliament to regional governments (like

the national Parliament in Scotland, the national Assembly in Wales and the national Assembly in N.

Ireland) has resulted in the creation of devolved systems of government. 

Even though the devolved systems have certain powers to make decisions in certain matters (education, health, depending on the region), the UK parliament still retains authority over the devolved institutions and the powers given to the regional governments can be withdrawn at any time.  These regional governments with delegated powers, though not wholly controlled by the UK parliament remain accountable to it.  

2. Describe the powers of the UK Parliament with reference to the text.

The text indicates that the UK parliament can withdraw all powers delegated to the devolved

administration at any time; it insists on the sovereignty of the UK Parliament as it possesses the

authority to make its own laws, amend them, and enforce changes that can become effective

immediately (like abolishing the Scottish parliament without a vote); and the UK parliament

functions within the framework of an unwritten constitution and changes can take place according to

the will of the parliament.

3. Why does Carwyn Jones insist on the need for a written constitution? 

First Minister Carwyn Jones insists on the need for a written constitution to state clearly the

extent of devolved powers to its regional governments. He also speaks of the need for safeguards to protect the devolved institutions from being dissolved by the Parliament without a vote. 

Reading Comprehension: Summary

This document comments on Welsh First Minister Carwyn Jones’s calls for a codified constitution for the UK.

C. Jones contends that the need to protect local assemblies in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland demands / requires a written codified constitution. Under the current system, these assemblies may be repealed by Westminster at any time (like any other statute) without a vote by the people.

Should they be enshrined / If they were enshrined in a written constitution, it would be impossible for Westminster to scrap regional parliaments without putting the question to the people.

Such a move would, without a doubt, put an end to the very principle of parliamentary sovereignty and would certainly officialise the fact that the UK is a looser entity with multiple centres of democratic accountability.

Yet, far from threatening its existence, a codified constitution would actually strengthen the UK as it could well convince Scotland to abandon its efforts to break away from the UK to become independent.

Exercise 1 (p. 42) : 

Complete the following sentences. Write only one sentence

1- While a civil action encompasses any dispute raised between a claimant against a defendant, 

criminal actions are launched by the Crown Prosecution Service which prosecutes one or 

several defendants for an alleged criminal offence. 

2- Unlike slander which is made orally, libel is construed as a permanent form of defamation, 

whether it be written in the press and on a website or expressed in works of art. 

3- Divisional courts have appellate jurisdictions over cases heard in county courts, and 

sometimes magistrates’ courts, and are present in each of the three branches of the High 

Court of Justice. 

4- In order to avoid a trial, parties to a civil litigation are usually strongly advised to settle their 

disputes through ADR or arbitration. 

5- Multi-track cases refer to complex cases which are usually allocated to the High Court of 

Justice. 

Grammar (p. 50-51):

1-Complete the following phrases with the right preposition: 

1- To be liable FOR something 

2- To claim damages FOR something 

3- To entitled TO compensation 

4- To bring a case AGAINST someone

5- To fine someone FOR something 

6- To sue FOR an injunction 

2- Find the missing prepositions in the following text: 

Inside justice: London Rent Assessment Panel 

Samir Jeraj observes an independent panel settle private rental disputes, including a rare case of a flat with 

'fair rent' controls. Guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 30 October 2012 16.11 GMT 

I arrive at the London Rent Assessment Panel near Goodge Street for a 9:30am hearing. [...] One of 

five Rent Assessment Panels in England, the quasi-judicial body aims to settle disputes between 

private landlords and tenants in London. The hearing room itself is intimate setting with two 

panellists and the involved parties sitting at tables. 

The first case is from a tenant contesting a rise in her current rent, which is just over £600 per 

month for a two-bed flat near Goodge Street. Like much of the property in the area, the lower floors 

have been shops and workshops, with the top floor remaining as a flat for some exhausted Victorian 

or Edwardian shopkeeper to retire to. The landlord, a large property company, gives some 

background. They purchased the whole building a few years ago and with it came the tenant who 

was entitled to stay under the law. The landlord wants to upgrade the flat - the rest of the building 

has been refurbished and they claim the the flat is "very dated". The somewhat unknown condition 

of the flat's interior is the key to deciding how much the rent can be raised. 

The tenant, an articulate woman in her early 40s, gives her own version of the recent history. The 

flat goes back to her uncle, a man who became the tenant there in 1965 when there was still a small 

factory downstairs. She moved in with him and, when he passed away, took on the tenancy herself. 

According to her, the flat has no central heating or fitted kitchen, and the windows and gutters are 

also in a poor condition. […] 

The last hearing is […] one of a dying breed, a historical aberration. The one bed flat is still 

protected by the 1977 Rent Act, one of maybe 100,000 in the UK that operate the rent controls 

subsequently abolished in 1988. Under this Act, rents can only rise by an amount liked to the retail 

price index, what's termed "Fair Rent". Unfortunately, the tenant hasn't turned up, so the panel 

proceeds with the landlord's case. The one-bed flat is in St John's Wood, where a comparable flat 

would be rented out for £24,000 a year. Just nearby on Abbey Road, a similar flat was being 

advertised at £23,900. […] The tenants and landlords will receive a decision notice within 28 days. 

The hearings are over by lunchtime, which means the committee can carry out their visits in the 

afternoon, and decide what the rent should be.