The Justification Of The Obiter Dicta Of Lambert

Great Essays
Register to read the introduction… The courts then formed a test called the test of proportionality. This test was originally created by Lord Hope in the case of Kebeline but it was amplified in Lambert and was explained further in Brown v Scott . The test holds three limbs which are, what the prosecution must prove in order for the burden to shift to the accused, what is the burden of the accused and what is the nature of the threat to society which the Act in question is trying to prevent. If the reverse burden given to the accused will achieve the aim or objective of the Act in consideration, the reversal of burden will take place. The purpose of the test is that to prevent the infringement of Art 6(2) and had it not been for Article 6(2), there would not be such a test to justify a reversal of …show more content…
If yes then the reverse burden is more easily justifiable. Lord Steyn in Lambert noted that the difference between elements of offence and defense are sometimes just a matter of drafting technique and went on to state that substance is the issue to be focused on, in preference . In Attorney General’s Reference (No. 4 of 2002) the defendant was accused of membership of a proscribed organization contrary to s11(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000 . The defense in 11(2) required him to prove that the organization was not proscribed on the last occasion on which he became a member and that he has not taken part in the activities of the organization at any time while it was proscribed. Though the offences were directed towards the legitimate end of deterring people from becoming members of such organizations and taking part in their terrorist activities, which was the view of Lord Rodger, Lord Bingham noted the extraordinary breadth of s11(1) considering a series of instances, such as joining the organization before proscription or joining with complete ignorance of its proscription, which might render a person liable to conviction without being guilty of any conduct which could reasonably be regarded as blameworthy. There may be very great difficulties in proving non participation in the activities of an organization and the penalty for the failure establish it is up to ten years …show more content…
The presumption of innocence was a part of the six cardinal rules to emphasize the importance of the principle of presumption of innocence. As the six cardinal principles may increase the effectiveness of judges in this particular area, the courts may choose not to apply the principles if it allows justice to be achieved. It is also noted that courts need not satisfy all the principles, only that it has been looked at and

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The rule in all civil actions the standard of proof required is always the balance of probabilities. However, some cases have created ambiguity by suggesting that where there is an element of criminal activity. This can require a higher quality of evidence to tip the balance. Despite authority that firmly rejects the notion of an intermediate standard, there is a body of case law that implies where criminal behaviour is averred the Standard of proof is of a different quality if it is to succeed. Judicial dicta contribute to this ambiguity creating the perception of an intermediate standard.…

    • 1066 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Ivic 2 Romeo Phillion: 31 Years Behind Bars "It was all fabrication, perjury, bias, promises and coercing. That 's how they built their case. There is not one piece of evidence that points at me; it all points the other way." – Romeo Phillion Miscarriages of justice, where an innocent individual is wrongfully convicted of a crime, were, until recently, thought to occur infrequently. Although the number of wrongful convictions is an unknown figure, it has been said to be approximately one to five percent of convictions in America each year, where one percent averages out to about 6000 cases (Anderson, Anderson & Marquis, 2001).…

    • 2950 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Bsbwor501 Part 1

    • 2094 Words
    • 9 Pages

    PART 1: SHORT RESPONSE 1. The steps in which the defendant is found guilty is a process of eleven steps. The first step there will be an investigation, shortly after the second step would be too arrest the suspect. When the suspect is escorted to the police station he/she will going through the third step booking into the system. After he/she is booked they will go through the fourth process of attending an initial appearance.…

    • 2094 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Wrongful sentences happen when innocent individuals are found at fault in criminal trials, or when defendants feel obligated to plea-bargain to crimes. Many of these defendants will only plead guilty hoping that they can escape the death penalty. The term unlawful conviction can also denote to cases in which a jury erroneously finds an individual with a good defense guilty, examples would include self defense, or where an appellate court reverses a conviction (unrelatedly to the defendant’s factual guilt) obtained in violation of the defendant’s legitimate rights. With the rising number of exonerations and growing awareness that such injustices occur every day in American courts, raises reflective doubts about the accuracy and fairness of the…

    • 1537 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Effects of wrongful conviction are commonly underrepresented in the Criminal Justice System. According to the Innocence project (2014), more than 1,300 individuals in the United States that were convicted of crimes have been exonerated and cleared of all charges brought against them. Errors consist of misleading eyewitness testimony, confessions that are coerced, criminal investigators getting tunnel vision, and corruption of prosecutors. Of the many difficulties exonerates face compensation, due to the state, impacted against them is often understated. Many face difficulties with finding employment, healthcare, and housing.…

    • 738 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The courts biggest issues were trying to decide whether a trial court’s erroneous deprivation of a criminal defendant’s choice of counsel entitles him to a reversal of his conviction and should proving the sixth Amendment right to proceed with the counsel of choice depend on whether the deprivation of that right also resulted in compromising a defendants’ right to a fair trial. The majority opinion did not apply the Strickland test because they felt that the defendant could not show or give any reason as to why he felt the counsel was ineffective and that the counsels performance was poorly presented and deficient and the defendant was prejudiced by it. What the Strickland test is actually intended for is that the government must contend that the defendant must at least demonstrate that his counsel of choice would have pursued a different strategy and would have created a :reasonable probability”. In court cases the course can be split into two structures; trial errors and structural errors. Most constitutional errors are trial errors that occur “during the presentation to the jury,” and courts have discretion in deciding whether these trial errors are harmless and warrant a new trial.…

    • 556 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Judicial Deference

    • 790 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Introduction This paper is based on varied literature including journal articles, research papers, online resources, edited books, etc. The main focus of this paper is to examine the UK courts procedure in relation to the concept of deference with regards section 3 and section 4 of the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998, it’s limitations and the essence of judicial deference to legislation and the interference of Parliamentary supremacy. In addition, it would be potent to highlight ‘the judicial approach to the scheme of the HRA particularly the interpretation and application of the interpretive obligation laid down in s 3 and the power to declare legislation incompatible under s4 as well as the construction by the judiciary of a principle of deference’…

    • 790 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Frye Case

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The case Frye V. The United States dealt with the admissibility of the systolic blood pressure test or better known as a lie detector test in court. Frye was convicted of murder in the second degree when he made the request to take the test and call an expert witness to read the test at his appeal. The test was to tell if he was telling the truth about the murder by monitoring his systolic blood pressure. If he was lying then his blood pressure would go up and if he was telling the truth it would start high and then gradually go down.…

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    o Therefore, within the statute. • Good Faith o If Maller and his legal team made the change to article 1 intentionally and not through inadvertence, then they would be acting in bad faith.…

    • 920 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Ward V Canada Case Summary

    • 1169 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The court brought in a legal rule of the pith and substance analysis. McLachlin of the Supreme Court said the pith and substance test is resolved by looking at the purpose and legal effect of the regulation or law. The purpose refers to what the legislature wanted to accomplish. In this case, the purpose was relevant to determine, if the Parliament was regulating the fishery, or venturing into the provincial area of property and civil rights. While the legal effect refers to how the law will affect rights and liabilities, which is also helpful in illuminating the core meaning of the law.…

    • 1169 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Good Faith Rule

    • 309 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The nature of the rule is to protect the integrity of the…

    • 309 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Accountability is an essential part of the rule of law. It is essential for another reason, as in the earlier editions of Dicey, of course modified in later editions, referring to John Wilkes's case, that "conferment of any discretion tends to arbitrariness and therefore there is something inconsistent with the rule of law." But then, as time passed, it was realized that conferment of some discretion for the purpose of application to the facts of a given case is something you cannot do away with. The area of discretion should be the minimum possible, and set norms, standards or guidelines should regulate it, so that it does not tend to become arbitrary. Therefore, the rule of non-arbitrariness is something to be tested by the judiciary whenever…

    • 282 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Dworkin on Judicial Discretion in “Hard Cases” Lu Zhao Boyu (Bozy) | A0127866R In the standard courtroom, one could reasonably expect the judge to be the one responsible for the holding of a case. However, does and should the judge exercise his own discretion when deciding cases? Prominent legal theorist H. L. A. Hart claims that judges do exercise discretion, especially in “hard cases”, where there is no pre-existing or unambiguous rule. To this matter, Hart’s brilliant student Ronald Dworkin offers an alternative theory, which argues that judges do not have discretion and should follow principles instead of rules, even in “hard cases”.…

    • 910 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The history of Equity in New Zealand, its relationship with common law, and the ‘fusion’ debate The equitable jurisdiction was defined in 1932 as “that body of rules administered by our English courts of justice which, were it not for the operation of the Judicature Acts, would be administered only by those courts which would be known as courts of Equity”. The New Zealand legal system is based on English common law and therefore the principles of Equity as they stand today are rooted in English history. However, following the implementation of the Judicature Act 1908 (NZ) and subsequent legal developments, the views of the New Zealand courts with respect to the intermingling of equitable and common law remedies can be observed to now be markedly…

    • 1208 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Generally, there are two elements to define a rule if a customary law or not: the physical and the psychical. In the aspect of the physical element, a customary law has international usage, general practice or usus. Namely, a customary law has to be practiced worldwide, continuously, repeatedly, unanimously and analogously. In the aspect of the psychical element, a customary law has to be accepted by states in the international society, to get the opinion Juris. The customary laws are usually unwritten.…

    • 1134 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays