Philosophy of law
Philosophy of law is a branch of philosophy and jurisprudence which studies basic questions about law and legal systems, such as "what is the law?", "what is the relationship between law and morality?" and many other similar questions. The question "What is law?" has received the most substantial attention from philosophers of law. Three schools of thought have provided rival answers to this question. Natural theory asserts that there are laws that are immanent in nature, to which enacted laws should correspond as closely as possible. This view is frequently summarized by the maxim: an unjust law is not a true law, in which "unjust" is defined as contrary to natural law.
Legal positivism is the view that the law is defined by the social rules or practices that identify certain norms as laws. Historically, the most important part of this theory was developed by Jeremy Bentham, whose views were popularized by his student, John Austin. Austin's version of legal positivism was based on the notion that the law is the command of the sovereign backed by the threat of punishment.
Legal realism is the view that the law should be understood as it is practiced in the courts, law offices, and police stations, rather than as it is set forth in statutes.
In the 20th century, two great legal positivists had a profound influence on the philosophy of law. On the continent, Hans Kelsen was the most influential theorist, and his legal views are still influential. In the Anglophone world, the most influential figure was Herbert Lionel Adolphus Hart, Professor of Jurisprudence at Oxford University, who is considered one of the most important legal philosophers. Hart's most famous work is The Concept of Law first published in 1961. He argued that the law should be understood as a system of social rules. Hart's theory, although widely admired, was criticized by a variety of late 20th century philosophers of law (R.Dworkin, J.Finnis, J.Raz)
Definition and scope of constitutional law
The starting-point for studying constitutional law should idently be the same starting-point as forstudying political philosophy, or the role оf law and government in society. How is individual freedom to be reconciled with the claims of social justice? Is society founded upon a reciprocal network of rights and duties, or is the individual merely a pawn in the hands of state power?
These fundamental questions are often not pursued explicitly in the study of constitutional law. Constitutional law concerns the relationship between the individual and the state. As a historian lias stated, law is not merely a matter of the rules which govern relations between private individuals (for example between husband and wife, or between landlord and tenant). Law also concerns the structure and powers of the state. The constitutional lawyer is always likely to insist that the relations between the individual and the state should be founded upon and governed by law.
But law does not exist in a social and political vacuum. Within a given society, the legal rules that concern relations between husband and wife will reflect that society's attitude to marriage. So too the rules of constitutional law, that govern political relations, will within a given society reflect a particular distribution of political power. In a stable society constitutional law expresses what may be a very high degree of consensus about the organs and procedures by which political decisions are taken.
Within a stable democracy, constitutional law reflects the value that people attach to orderly human relations, to individual freedom under the law, and to institutions such as parliament, political parties, free elections, and free press. Laws are the product ofhuman decisions. As Lord Acton said, ''Power tends to corrupt and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely". But the weaknesses and imperfections of human nature are not a reason for discarding law as a means of regulating political conduct. The laws of football are often broken. But if we shoot the referee and tear up the rules, football as an organized activity ceases to exist.
Total disbelief in the valued the individual or in the possibility of public good is therefore a bad starting-point for studying constitutional law. But there is no need to go to the other extreme that in Great Britain we have a matchless constitution. Constitutional law is one branch of humnan learning and experience that helps to make life in today's world more tolerable and less brutish than it might otherwise be.
The English Judicial System
A feature common to the system of law in the UK is that there is no complete code. The cases are decided basing on precedent that is previous legal decisions. The English judicial system works in England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own judicial systems.
Now I’ll tell about the main types of British courts.
The courts of the lowest level are Magistrates Courts which deal with the majority of cases. These courts are overseen by unpaid and part-time magistrates chosen from the local community.
County courts are on the next level. They deal with basic civil cases.
Crown courts deal with any criminal cases not dealt with in the Magistrates Courts. A Magistrates Court may remit a case to the Crown Court if it believes it is sufficiently serious as the sentencing powers of magistrates are severely limited.
High Court has three ‘division’. These are the:
Family Division which deals with non-criminal cases to do with domestic law;
Chancery Division which deals with business and property law; and,
Queens Bench Division which deals with other civil law cases including those of slander and breach of contract.
Court of Appeal has two divisions dealing with appeals regarding criminal and civil law.
The House of Lords is currently the most senior UK Court where appeals against the decision of lower courts in both criminal and civil cases are decided. In 2009, a new Supreme Court will take on responsibility as the UK’s highest court of appeal. It will have jurisdiction over the whole UK system including Scotland. It will result in the Judges of Appeal not sitting in the House of Lords (as is the case at present) and will finally ensure the separation of the Legislature from the Judiciary in the UK.