Monday, 8 June 2009

2009 Exam Papers

PAPER 2. Constitutional Law
1. 'The British constitution fails to embody an adequate conception of the separation of powers; that this is a bad thing can be seen most clearly when on considers the executive's respective relationships with the judicial and legislative branches.' Discuss.
2. 'The rule of law is a legal concept which, in English law, acquires practical effect principally through judicial interpretation of legislation.' Critically assess this claim. To what extent does the interpretative duty of the courts under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 reduce the relevance of the rule of law to the interpretation of legislation by judges?

3. The (imaginary) Legislative Procedure and Human Rights Act 2008 provides as follows:
1. (1) Section 1 of this Act may be repealed or amended only by means of a provision in an Act of Parliament which has been approved by a two-thirds majority of both Houses.
(2) Acts of Parliament may take effect without royal assent.
2. (1) The Human Rights Act 1998 is hereby repealed.
(2) All legislation passed and to be passed shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent that it is compatible with the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights.
Consider the following alternative situations:
(a) The (imaginary) Animal Welfare Act 2009, which criminalises certain kinds of fishin, is approved by both Houses of Parliament but does not receive royal assent. Karl, who has been charged with an offence under the Animal Welfare Act, wishes to argue in his defence that the Act is invalid.
(b) Section 1 of the (imaginary) Legislative Procedure (Reform) Act 2009 provides that, 'Section 1(") of the Legislative Procedure and Human Rights Act 2008 is hereby repealed.' Mike, a leading anti-monarchy campaigner, wishes to know whether section 1 of the Legislative Procedure (Reform) Act 2009 is legally valid. The 2009 Act received royal assent and was approved by both Houses, but in both cases by majorities falling short of two-thirds.
(c) Section 1 of the (imaginary) Sedition Act 2009 criminalises, in a way that is inconsistent with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, criticism of government policy. Julie, a prominent critic of the government, wishes to know whether section 1 of the Sedition Act 2009 could be enforced against her if she were to breach it.
Advise Karl, Mike and Julie.
4. 'It would be futile to attempt to understand the British constitution by looking only at constitutional law. The application of such law is informed - and sometimes radically affected - by constitutional conventions.' Do you agree with this statement? Give examples to justify your answer.
5. Assume that the (imaginary) EC Financial Services Directive requires Member States, by 1 January 2009, to ensure that consumers entering into contracts for financial services and insurance have the right to withdraw from such contracts, without penalty, for a period of 100 days following the formation of the contract (a 'cooling-off period'). Assume further that UK law currently requires financial institutions only to allow such consumers a 'reasonable' cooling-off period, and that this has, in general, been interpreted by domestic courts as meaning up to two weeks.
On 2 January 2009, Gabrielle, a single parent who recently lost her job, signs a contract for a £10,000 loan from Wisteria Loans Ltd at an annual interest rate of 16 per cent. On 2 April 2009, she discovers that she could have obtained a loan from elsewhere at a more competitive interest rate. She seeks to cancel the contract with Wisteria, but they content that she has no right to pull out because the cooling-off period provided for under UK law is now over.
On 2 January 2009, Carlos takes out and pays for a five-year health insurance policy with Fairview, a major high street bank in which the government recently took a 45 per cent shareholding in order to ensure that the bank survived the global banking crisis. On 2 April 2009, Fairview refuses to pay out under the insurance policy to reimburse Carlos for private medical treatment for a long-standing back complaint, pointing out that pre-existing medical conditions are not covered by the policy. Carlos, who had failed to notice the exclusion, wishes to pull out of the contract; the bank refuses to allow him to do so.
Advise Gabrielle and Carlos. What difference, if any, would it make to your answer if, on 1 January 2009, the UK had enacted and brought into force legislation providing that, 'notwithstanding the Financial Services Directive, the cooling-off period for contracts concerning financial services and insurance shall be 14 days'?
6. 'The devolution systems which exist in the United Kingdom derive from, and thus underline, features of the British constitution that are unusual or even unique to it.' How far, if at all, do you agree with this statement?
7. 'Judicial review by English courts shows evidence of increasing judicial activism. This damaging development, which risks judicial usurpation of executive functions, is most apparent from the judges' willingness to embrace the proportionality doctrine and to subject the use of an increasing range of prerogative powers to review.' Discuss.
8. The (imaginary) Credit Crunch Act 2009 authorises the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform to make grants of up to £100,000 to 'small businesses which are experiencing financial difficulties'.
Orson is an independent travel agent specialising in long-haul holidays. With his business on the brink of collapse, he unsuccessfully applies for a grant to the Secretary of State. Orson receives from a junior official in the Minister's department a letter in the following terms: 'I have turned down your application for two reasons. First, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change told me to turn it down: he thinks that long-haul air travel should be discourage in light of its environmental impact. Secondly, your application falls outside the Business Secretary's policy which is to make grants only to firms in the manufacturing sector.' Orson is aggrieved by (among other things) the fact that he requested but was denied an oral hearing prior to the taking of the decision.
Bree, the owner of the UK's largest battery hen farming firm successfully applies for a grant. The Business Secretary and Bree rowed in the same boat when they were students at Cambridge. Rex, a celebrity chef who campaigns against battery hen farming, is incensed by the Minister's decision. Advise Orson and Rex.
9. 'The Human Rights Act 1998 imposes obligations to respect certain rights not only upon public bodies but also, quite rightly, upon individuals.'
Discuss with reference to the way in which the legal protection of privacy has been enhanced at common law since the entry into force of the Human Rights Act.
10. Following a government decision to allow the construction of a new runway at a major airport, the following events occur:
i) A thousand people - at the instigation of Tom, a well known pacifist - gather outside the Palace of Westminster and march towards Downing Street. They come to a halt near Downing Street, impeding the flow of traffic along the main road. The police, concerned that the crowd may contain a small number of hardcore protesters and fearful that they might intimidate government ministers as they arrive for a Cabinet meeting, set up a security cordon around the protesters within which they are all required to remain for several hours. Tom asks to leave but is denied permission to do so.
ii) Kayla, a civil servant in the Department for Transport, leaks to the press a document marked 'top secret' containing advice to the Secretary of State for Transport to the effect that if the new runway is used to full capacity, the UK will definitely not meet its international commitments to reduce carbon emissions. The leak causes a major political scandal, since the Secretary had always denied that the new runway would produce such effects. Kayla later confesses to her boss that she was responsible for the leak but tells him that 'blowing the whistle was for the greater good of the environment'. Kayla now faces prosecution under the Official Secrets Act 1989. Discuss.
11. 'Contempt of court may be used to prevent or penalise an act which prejudices or impedes legal proceedings. However, in order not to violate the right to freedom of expression, particularly in cases involving the press, it is important to limit contempt in relation to statements and publications to cases in which information or views are expressed in unbalanced terms rather than objectively informing the public about the case.' Consider the extent to which this is an accurate account of the current law of contempt of court.

PAPER 4. Tort Law
1. Either a) Explain how far the law of tort allows a claim in respect of i) exposing another person to a risk of future harm and ii) causing another person to lose the chance of a benefit.
Or b) 'The English law of libel makes it unreasonably difficult for the media to report honestly on matters of public interest and importance.' Discuss.
2. Stichus was employed for 10 years by Aulus. In 2007 he left to set up in business on his own, but things did not work out, and in 2009 he sought employment with Balbus, who offered him a job 'subject to satisfactory references'.
Consider the possible tortious liability of Aulus in each of the following situations:
i) Aulus refused to provide a reference for Stichus and in consequence Balbus decided not to employ him.
ii) Balbus approached Aulus for a reference; Aulus, being irritated with Stichus, wrote him an unfairly bad one, and in consequence Balbus decided not to employ him.
iii) Aulus wrote Stichus a glowing reference, on the strength of which Balbus employed him; in fact, as Aulus was well aware, Stichus had left Aulus's employment under a cloud, having been suspected of theft and fraud; Stichus abuses his new position with Balbus to steal a large amount of money, which he is unable to repay.
3. Grump, aged 80, who is in the early stages of dementia, lives in a flat in sheltered accommodation, run by Blankshire County Council. Grump, who is wealthy, pays an allowance to his adult son, Leech, who aspires to be an artist. Leech tells the warden, Mopp, that the hot water in Grump's flat is intermittently overheating, so creating a risk of scalding. Mopp reports the fault to Hopeless Heating Ltd, with which Blankshire has a maintenance contract. Hopeless sends an engineer, Wrench, to call on Grump, but Grump, taking against him, falsely tells him that all is well and sends him away Wrench reports this to Hopeless, who tells Mopp that the problem has been resolved and Mopp takes no further action. Shortly afterwards, Grump severely scalds himself in the shower because the water has once again overheated, and dies in hospital a week later. On Grump's death Leech loses his allowance, but inherits most of Grump's wealth.
a) What claims in tort (if any) may now be brought by Leech (either personally, or as the executor of Grump's estate)?
b) Would your answer be different if, in breach of the service contract, Hopeless had failed to send an engineer to check the fault?
4. Strop, who suffers from epileptic fits, is warned by his doctor, Wuss, that, if he persists in driving Wuss will inform the police. Strop replies 'If you do that I shall sue you under the Human Rights Act' which induces Wuss not to carry out his threat. Some weeks later Strop has a fit when driving and collides with a van belonging to Chris, an interior decorator and designer, and driven by Chris's employee, Pete. Pete suffers various injuries, including a head injury that would probably have been avoided if he had worn a seat-belt. Six months later Pete is diagnosed as permanently unfit for work, and leaves his job.
Advise Chris and Pete on their possible claims in tort, given that:
i) Chris's van has been destroyed; his business has suffered in consequence of the absence of Pete; and partly because Chris has a history of depression, the resulting worry has caused him to have a severe nervous breakdown.
ii) Not only is Pete unemployed, bu his head injury has caused a change of personality, making him irritable and violent; so that when taunted on his facial scars resulting from his accident by Yob, a fellow drinker in the Boozer's Arms, he strikes him with a bar-stool and kills him - thereby incurring a 5-year prison sentence for manslaughter.
5. 'The Consumer Portection Act 1987 would be more accurately called the Act for the Persecution of Producers.' Discuss.
6. Discuss the possible tortious liability of Jaron, a dishonest dentist, in the following situations:
i) anxious to increase his work, he falsely tells a gullible patient, Dave, that he needs twenty fillings, which he then carries out and charges for, drilling and filling twenty previously good teeth;
ii) he has an affair with a married patient, Slapper, failing to inform her that he is suffering from Hepatitis B; when she contracts the disease from Jaron, he rich husband, Peeve, discovers the affair and promptly divorces her, leaving her in reduced financial circumstances.
iii) despite being struck off the Dental Register for professional misconduct because of i) and ii) he continues to practice, thereby committing a criminal offence against the Dentists Act 1984, the statute regulating dental practice; during this period he gives innovative dental treatment to Richard; although Jaron carries out this procedure with due care, an unfortunate side-effect is that Richard suffers a permanent loss of sensation in his mouth.
7. Lord Snooty, having fallen on hard times, turns his ancestral home Bunkerton Castle into an amusement park, which the public are invited to enter on payment for admission. On the advice of his solicitor, Desmond, and of his insurer, Welsh, he puts up a notice at the entrance saying 'Warning, all visitors enter at their own risk', and has the same words printed in small type on the back of the admission tickets. Consider Snooty's possible tortious liability in the following situations:
i) In the grounds there stands a lake where, at first, visitors were allowed to swim and dive. After a health and safety inspector warns Snooty that it was unsafe to swim there, Snooty puts up a large notice saying 'no swimming' and engages a contractor, Laches, to remove the diving-board. Before Laches has carried out the work, Darren aged 12 and illiterate, enters the park without payment through a hole in the perimeter fence. Darren dives into the lake from the board, breaks his neck and is now paralysed.
ii) In the stables are horses which visitors can ride under the supervision of Snooty's employee, Forelock. Tracy, aged 11, is injured when the horse that she was riding, Bronco, rears in fright because Forelock's dog, which he has brought to work with him in breach of orders, snaps at Bronco's heels. Bronco is normally docile, but like many horses, will rear if he is scared by a sudden noise behind him.
iii) In a paddock Snooty keeps a herd of llamas. Venge, a disgruntled keeper employed by Snooty who has just given him a week's notice of dismissal, deliberately lets them out. Some of them wander into Bill's garden, where they trample his lawn and eat his vegetables, and others escape onto the road where Ben, swerving to avoid them, falls off his motorcycle and breaks his leg.
8. In Effluent Road, Stretchford, there stands an empty warehouse, owned by Weird. Next door there stands a building which Shifti, in breach of planning permission, uses for the bulk storage of polystyrene, having bribed Bakanda, an inspector employed by the Stretchford City Council, to turn a blind eye. Further down the street there is a gym, owned and run by Truss. Behind all three buildings stands a market garden, owned and occupied by Green. One winter, Weird's warehouse is occupied by squatters, whose drunken and disorderly behaviour in the street causes many of Truss' clients to stay away, so damaging his business. Truss complains about this to Weird, who does nothing. When the weather turns cold, the squatters take it upon themselves to reconnect the gas supply. Their amateur gas-fitting is incompetent, so that the building later fills with gas, causing an explosion and a faire. The fire spreads to Shifti's warehouse, where his polystyrene is ignited and burns furiously. The fire in Shifti's warehouse rapidly engulfs Truss' gym next door, which is totally destroyed. Clouds of poisonous smoke and fumes from the burning polystyrene pollute Green's market garden, ruining his crops, and causing injury to Brown, Green's head gardener, who inhales fumes when trying unsuccessfully to rescue Green's truck, which despite his efforts perishes in the flames. Discuss the tortious liabilities that arise.
Click to read more.

Helpful hints and links

Answering a Constitutional question

1. Read the question
Carefully read the rubric to define precisely what the assessor wants. This is usually to be found at the end of the problem scenario and consists of 'Advise Mr and Mrs X' or the curt 'Discuss', a command that can be interpreted to mean 'advise all the parties referred to'. If you are asked to advise Mr and Mrs X then you need only consider their position and should not waste time by referring to the position of other parties mentioned in the problem scenario.
Occasionally, you may be asked to concentrate, or even avoid, just one aspect of the law, for example, 'address/avoid the issues of natural justice which arise in this problem'. Always be wary of a 'sting in the tail' of the question which might add a new element to the facts of the problem, for example, 'Would your answer be different if the decision-making body was not a public body?'

2. Read the scenario
It is important to read through the whole scenario in order to gain an overview of the issues raised. Once you have a general feel for the problem, you can turn to the specific sentences to see what issues of law arise. If you are asked in the rubric to advise more than one party, then read through the problem scenario again looking for the specific issues which relate to the particular party in question.
It is worth remembering that problem scenarios involving judicial review traditionally require the formulation of grounds for making the application for judicial review, from the facts given in the problem scenario, whilst problem scenarios involving civil liberties traditionally require reference to statutory powers and procedures. If the information you have received from the assessor is incomplete or ambiguous, then it is your responsibility to identify it as such and utilise that fact in your legal reasoning.

3. Identify the relevant legal issues
In formulating your advice for a judicial review problem question, you might work from the following checklist to identify all the relevant issues:
A) Identify the 'decision or action' which is to be challenged
B) Consider whether the body making that decision is a public body and/or whether it is the type of decision against which a challenge can be made
C) Moving on to the grounds of the application, has the decision-making body acted beyond its powers, in that it had no jurisdiction to make the decision or otherwise acted with illegality?
D) Has that decision-making body abused its powers, in the sense that it has acted with procedural impropriety or irrationality?
E) What will be the appropriate procedure to use when making the application - noting the inherent issues of locus standi, leave and delay contained within the Order 53 procedure?
F) What remedy is it that the party you are asked to advise should seek, namely a public law remedy and/or a private law remedy of declaration, injunction or damages? Your answer to this is likely to be of primary importance to the party you are advising.

Answering a Tort question

1. Identify the duty (Capara v Dickman only needs to be used when a duty is not established)
2. Identify whether the duty has been breached (A. Note the standard and B. see if they breached it)
3. See whether there is causation (Either factual, the 'but for' test; or legal, whether the chain of causation has been broken by a novus actus interveniens)
4. Assess remoteness (was the type of damage caused reasonably foreseeable under Wagon Mound II?)
5. See what damages (if any) are owed.

How to answer a constitutional question
A useful explanation of the government and Parliament
Some notes on politics
Online resource for Constitutional and Administrative Law
Law Express
More Constitutional and Administrative Law
Judicial Review

Law of Contract Summarised
Australian Contract Law resource page

Land law information

Simple Tort summary
Model answers to some Tort problems
Negligence answer model
Selected excerpts from Tort Q&A

Acts and Statutes list
Case law search
List of Pearson Law companion websites
Electric Law Library
Free 'Unlocking the Law' model answers and multiple choice questions
American 'First Year Law Review' blog
Mike Shecket Law Notes
Oxford University Press online resources for Law
Click to read more.

Thursday, 28 May 2009


Stand by for an update some time next week including:

- Further information on Cambridge's replacement for the LNAT: the Cambridge Law Test
- 2009 exam papers for Constitutional, Contract, International, Land and Tort
- Useful and FREE online resources for the above subjects

Click to read more.

Saturday, 27 September 2008

LNAT Scores 2007/8

I have been getting a reasonable number of hits for LNAT scores (I think most probably for straight undergraduate law), but in the spirit of helping out not only those people who might wander across this blog, but also assisting anyone who is applying to Oxford or Cambridge (the latter's need for the LNAT becoming defunct after 2009), I am reproducing not only the aforementioned keywords (as sic), but a list of statistics helpfully collated by the members of one of the most well-frequented internet student forums.

Obviously these are flawed due to them firstly not having the same number of entrants for each institution, and that some of the scores are repeats due to individuals applying to two or more LNAT universities, but still, they make interesting reading. All of the scores mentioned received offers, aside from the Cambridge entry which includes colleges, interviews, poolings and rejections. Those for whom no extra information was known have no brackets following the score.

For all other queries, my LNAT FAQ is available here.

average LNAT scores for Oxbridge
oxford senior status need to take LNAT
lnat tution in birmingham
how much do i need to score for cambridge LNAT
oxford lnat average
LNAT hertfordshire
lnat average score nottingham
senior status law cambridge lnat
LNAT tuition birmingham
does nottingham trent uni require lnat
lnat statistics

Universities and Scores
20, 21, 14, 23, 20, 17, 21, 22, 22, 23, 19, 20, 25
Average = 20.5

16, 24, 27, 22, 23, 25, 20, 18, 14
Average = 21.0

Accepted - 24 (Hughes Hall), 21 (St Edmund's), 24 (Downing, pooled to Fitzwilliam), 21 (Queens', deferred), 21 (Queens'), 22 (Downing), 19 (pooled to Sidney Sussex), 17, 16
Rejected - 19 (Christ's), 18, 17, 17 (King's, invited to interview), 20 (Selwyn), 21 (not known, invited to interview), 24 (Emmanuel, pooled to Churchill), 20 (Robinson, pooled), 24, 18, 16, 22 (Christ's, invited to interview), 16 (Corpus Christi, invited to interview)
Average Accepted = 20.6
Average Rejected = 19.4

22, 20, 20, 26, 23, 19, 23, 23, 22, 18, 14, 22, 18, 21, 14, 24, 15, 20
Average = 20.2

21, 21, 18, 21, 17, 23, 17, 19, 23, 20
Average = 20.0

KCL (King's College London)
22, 20, 26, 17, 21, 19, 23, 24, 18, 20, 18, 20, 17, 15, 19, 22, 18, 19, 17, 21, 16, 18, 20
Average = 19.6

22, 23, 22, 18, 18, 27, 24, 21, 18, 21, 19, 18, 19, 23, 17, 22, 19, 20, 22, 17, 19, 20, 20, 20, 14, 21, 21, 23, 21, 13
Average = 20.1

27, 26, 21, 20, 19, 18, 22, 23
Average = 22.0

UCL (University College London)
24, 21, 18, 26, 20, 19, 21, 22, 14, 21, 25, 20, 22
Average = 21.0
Click to read more.

Sunday, 7 September 2008

Cambridge opts out of LNAT (article)

*I will be leaving the LNAT advice in the Cambridge FAQ for now, as it is still relevant for 2009 candidates*

"In 2004, the University of Cambridge, along with a number of other universities, introduced the Law National Admissions Test (LNAT) as part of its admissions process. It was hoped that it would help with admissions decisions by providing additional information about applicants‟ aptitude for legal study. The intention was that LNAT performance would constitute one of several factors which would assist in the difficult task of distinguishing between the many outstanding applications which Cambridge receives every year from prospective Law students.

The LNAT consists of two parts: a multiple-choice section and an essay section. The University considers the opportunity provided by the LNAT to obtain written work produced by applicants under examination conditions to be a valuable one. But a view has been reached following a recent study commissioned by the Faculty of Law and the Cambridge Colleges that the numerical scores awarded to applicants in the multiple-choice section of the test do not provide sufficiently distinctive and useful information within the Cambridge admissions process to justify applicants being required to sit the LNAT and pay the fee involved in doing so.

The University is committed to using the LNAT in the forthcoming admissions round but is today announcing that the test will not be used thereafter. Applicants applying for entry in 2009 (or deferred entry in 2010) will therefore, as already advertised, be required to take the test, but applicants in subsequent years will not. The University will also withdraw from the LNAT Consortium Ltd, which runs the test and of which the University is a founder member. The Faculty of Law and the Colleges propose to work together with the aim of implementing new arrangements for the 2009-10 admissions round and thereafter. It is envisaged that applicants who are offered an interview at Colleges participating in the new arrangements would be asked to write an essay under examination conditions. As with the essay in the LNAT test, no knowledge of the law would be expected, and the essay questions would be designed to give an opportunity to demonstrate the ability to write clearly and construct logical, balanced arguments. It is intended that applicants attending for interview would write the essay in Cambridge as part of the interview process, and would not be required to pay any fee.

The Director of Admissions for the Cambridge Colleges, Dr Geoff Parks, says the decision to phase out the LNAT has been based on criteria which may be unique to the university:

The University of Cambridge has made the decision to stop using the LNAT based on its own assessment of the usefulness of the test in the context of Cambridge‟s admissions process, which is distinctively different from those of other universities. The University appreciates that the test may be very helpful as part of different admissions processes in other universities, and its decision to stop using the test should not be taken as an indication that the test as a whole is unhelpful in those different contexts.”
Click to read more.

Tuesday, 26 August 2008

Reading Lists/Introductory Books

Although by no means necessary, it is always useful to have read a few books on or about law before considering a conversion course, attending an interview, or beginning one's degree. Below are a selection of colleges' reading lists and introductory texts that are sent to potential students. By no means is reading these books compulsory, but these are some pieces of literature which have been chosen for their friendliness to the law layman, as well as being (relatively!) enjoyable to read.

Learning the Law - Glanville Williams
What About Law? - O'Sullivan & Virgo
Letters to a Law Student: A Guide to Studying Law at University - Nicholas McBride

St Edmund's
Discovering the Law - Sean Butler (editor)
Letters to a Law Student - Nicholas McBride

Learning legal skills - Simon Lee + Marie Fox (2nd ed 1994)
Learning legal rules - James Holland + Julian Webb (1991)
Studying law - Phillip Kenny (4th ed 1998)

An introduction to Roman Law - Barry Nicholas (1962, 2nd impression 1975)
Constitutional reform - R Blackburn + R Plant (1999)
Tort Law - Tony Weir
Understanding Criminal Law - CMV Clarckson (1987, 2nd impression 1989)

Advocates - David Pannick (1992)
Judges - David Pannick (1992)
Eve was framed - Helena Kennedy (1992)
The politics of the judiciary - JAG Griffith (4th ed 1991)
The law machine - Marcel Berlins + Clare Dyer (3rd ed 1989)
The discipline of law - Lord Denning (1979)
Click to read more.

Friday, 15 August 2008

Practice Questions

Law applicants to the one, two or three year course at any institution may find these questions both useful and interesting to mull over, as well as a practice tool with which they may put themselves in the analytical mindset that they will have to apply in an interview or test situation.

Kindly supplied by a St Edmund's applicant.

“The day before your interview you will be given a written test. It should take no more than about 1 hour (and so is likely to be about 500-800 words), it does not involve the use of any books. The test is not designed to test knowledge as such, but more your ability at critical thinking, analysis and presentation.
You will receive the questions by email, and return your answer by email, and you will have about a day to return your answer.”


December 2007
1. Discuss whether capital punishment is ever justified?
2. Is international law really 'law', or simply national behaviour given the title 'law' in order to imply order, structure and precedent?
3. Under what conditions may the State suspend parts of 'the rule of law'? How should that suspension be limited?

December 2005
1. What do you think are the key elements of a sound legal system?
2. How much freedom should judges have when interpreting the law?
3. When should an activity be made a criminal wrong, and when a civil wrong?

December 2004
1. When should the law restrict freedom of speech?
2. Just because something is described as a court does not give it moral or legal validity unless it has the attributes of a proper court. What are those attributes?
3. How far should the law regulate our private activities which do not harm or affect others?

December 2003
1. A charity has collected, over many years (and mostly in small amounts), the sum of $500,000 "for the purpose of protecting the Scottish porpoise" which was indigenous to an area of Northern Scotland. Despite their efforts, the porpoise is now extinct. What should they do with their funds?
2. How would you appoint judges, and what criteria should we be looking for in judges?
3. Are you entitled to disobey a law which, by 'universal standards' is unethical?

December 2002
1. What rights should employees have, with respect to their employment?
2. In what ways is it right to limit a person's right to freedom of speech?
3. When is theft reasonable?
4. Why do we have laws; could we do without them?
Click to read more.