THIS PAPER IS NOT TO BE REMOVED FROM THE EXAMINATION HALLS

UNIVERSITY OF LONDON LA1031 ZA

DIPLOMA IN LAW/CertHE COMMON LAW

LLB
DIPLOMA IN THE COMMON LAW
BSc DEGREES WITH LAW

Legal system and method

Wednesday 17 May 2017: 10.00 – 13.15

Candidates will have THREE HOURS AND FIFTEEN MINUTES in which to

answer the questions.

Candidates must answer the COMPULSORY question in PART A, TWO from

the EIGHT questions in PART B and the COMPULSORY question in PART C.

NOTE: Candidates may detach the sections of the Dealing in Cultural Objects
(Offences) Act 2003 from pages 7 to 9 of this question paper for ease of
reference in answering Question 10.

Candidates must answer all parts of a question unless otherwise stated.

Permitted materials
None.

© University of London 2017

UL17/0548
Page 1 of 9
PART A

Candidates must answer this COMPULSORY question about the seen case
Broadview Energy Developments Ltd v The Secretary of State for Communities
and Local Government & Ors [2016] EWCA Civ 562.

1. (a) Who is the appellant in this case and what did they want to build
on a site known as “Spring Farm Ridge”? (2 marks)

(b) What duty does Longmore LJ say the appeal raises questions
about? (1 mark)

(c) What ‘privately made representations’ did the appellant complain

of? (3 marks)

(d) What distinction does Longmore LJ make between oral

representations and those made in writing? (3 marks)

(e) What reasons does Longmore LJ give to support his view that ‘the
chronology is important’ in respect of the ‘tea room conversation’
and the ‘lobby badgering’? (4 marks)

(f) What is the ratio decidendi of this appeal? (3 marks)

(g) What points does McCombe LJ make in his criticism of the

judgment of Cranston J (the judge at first instance)? (4 marks)

(h) This case has nothing to do with the decision to withdraw from the
European Union or the details of any future relationship with the
European Union. Those are political issues which are matters for
ministers and Parliament to resolve. They are not issues which
are appropriate for resolution by judges, whose duty is to decide
issues of law which are brought before them.

Some of the most important issues of law which judges have to

decide concern questions relating to the constitutional
arrangements of the United Kingdom. These proceedings raise
such issues. This is not because they concern the United
Kingdom’s membership of the European Union; it is because they
concern (i) the extent of ministers’ power to effect changes in
domestic law through exercise of their prerogative powers at the
international level, and (ii) the relationship between the UK
government and Parliament on the one hand and the devolved
legislatures and administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern
Ireland on the other.

(Adapted from the decision of the Supreme Court in R (on the

application of Miller and another) (Respondents) v Secretary of
State for Exiting the European Union (Appellant) (2017).
PLEASE TURN OVER

UL17/0548
Page 2 of 9
 (i) Why are the details of any future relationship with
the European Union NOT matters to be decided by
judges? (2 marks)

(ii) What TYPE of issues of law does this case raise?

(1 mark)

(iii) What SPECIFIC questions of law does the case

raise? (2 marks)

PART B

Candidates must answer TWO questions in this section.

2. “Judicial approaches to statutory interpretation have changed over the

centuries. This is because the judges have, at different times, had more
respect for the legislative supremacy of Parliament.”

Describe the ‘rules’ of statutory interpretation and explain the extent to

which these approaches can be said to value the legislative supremacy
of Parliament.

3. “There can be no doubt that judges do, and that judges should, make
law.”

Discuss this statement describing the extent to which judges actually

make law and explaining the limits on judicial law making.

4. “Although the doctrine of binding precedent may have many merits, the
promotion of certainty and predictability is not one of them.”

Describe how the doctrine of binding precedent operates and identify

and explain the advantages and disadvantages of the doctrine with
particular reference to certainty and predictability.

5. “The only way to achieve a diverse judiciary within the next 30 years is
to introduce positive discrimination – or some other special provision –
that takes into account gender and ethnicity.”

Explain why positive discrimination might be necessary to increase the

diversity of the judiciary and describe what diversity initiatives have been
introduced in recent years and evaluate the progress these initiatives
have achieved.

UL17/0548
Page 3 of 9
6. “The independence of the judiciary is the cornerstone of the rule of law
and is vital to our constitution and our freedoms. The reputation of our
judiciary is unrivalled and our judges are people of integrity and
impartiality.”

Describe the two key aspects of judicial independence and explain how
institutional judicial independence is constitutionally significant.

7. “The cuts to legal aid under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment
of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) have resulted in negative consequences
for access to justice with the greatest impact affecting the poorest and
most vulnerable sectors of society.”

Explain how LASPO has affected access to justice in England and Wales
and describe which people or groups of persons have been most
affected by cuts to legal aid.

8. “Mediation is no longer regarded as a useful alternative or supplement

to public courts, but as an equal or, indeed, preferable method of
handling disputes that increases access to justice.”

Explain this statement and discuss the advantages and disadvantages

of mediating civil disputes.

9. “Trial by jury often brings badly behaved citizens into the courtroom or
gives a narrow group of so called ‘representatives of the public’ a
decisive voice in delivering justice.”

Discuss this statement with reference to jury composition and recent

cases on jury misbehaviour.

UL17/0548
Page 4 of 9
PART C

Candidates must answer this COMPULSORY question.

10. In March 2017, Adam visited Egypt. While he was in Egypt he bought a
statue of Nekhbet, the vulture god, and sold a piece of papyrus (a type
of paper containing ancient writings).

The statue of Nekhbet was dug up from a burial site and is about 2,200
years old. Adam bought the statue from Bomani for £4,000, which is
less than one quarter of its market value. Adam was able to negotiate
this cheap price because Bomani told him that the statue had been
stolen from a museum in Egypt.

The papyrus Adam sold is about 2,500 years old. It was removed from
the wreck of a boat which is buried under the water in the mud of the
Red Sea.

Adam returned to the United Kingdom in May 2017. He was stopped by

Claudia, a Customs and Excise officer, who searched his luggage. She
found the statue and is considering prosecuting Adam.

Under Egyptian law it is illegal to remove objects from burial sites or

other places where cultural objects are buried, or to export objects more
than 200 years old without the appropriate export documents.

(a) Explain to Adam whether or not the statue or the papyrus are
tainted cultural objects. (12 marks)

(b) Explain whether or not Adam has committed an offence

under section 1 of the Act in buying the statue of Nekhbet.
(9 marks)

(c) Explain to Claudia by what authority, and how, she might

initiate a prosecution against Adam. (4 marks)

END OF PAPER

UL17/0548
Page 5 of 9
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK

UL17/0548
Page 6 of 9
 ELIZABETH II c. 27

Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences)

Act 2003
2003 CHAPTER 27

An Act to provide for an offence of acquiring, disposing of, importing or

exporting tainted cultural objects, or agreeing or arranging to do so; and for
connected purposes. [30th October 2003]

B E IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and
consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present
Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

1 Offence of dealing in tainted cultural objects

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he dishonestly deals in a cultural object that
is tainted, knowing or believing that the object is tainted.
(2) It is immaterial whether he knows or believes that the object is a cultural object.
(3) A person guilty of the offence is liable—
(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding
seven years or a fine (or both),
(b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six
months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or both).

2 Meaning of “tainted cultural object”

(1) “Cultural object” means an object of historical, architectural or archaeological
interest.
(2) A cultural object is tainted if, after the commencement of this Act—
(a) a person removes the object in a case falling within subsection (4) or he
excavates the object, and
(b) the removal or excavation constitutes an offence.

Page 7 of 9
2 Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act 2003 (c. 27)

(3) It is immaterial whether—

(a) the removal or excavation was done in the United Kingdom or
elsewhere,
(b) the offence is committed under the law of a part of the United Kingdom
or under the law of any other country or territory.
(4) An object is removed in a case falling within this subsection if—
(a) it is removed from a building or structure of historical, architectural or
archaeological interest where the object has at any time formed part of
the building or structure, or
(b) it is removed from a monument of such interest.
(5) “Monument” means—
(a) any work, cave or excavation,
(b) any site comprising the remains of any building or structure or of any
work, cave or excavation,
(c) any site comprising, or comprising the remains of, any vehicle, vessel,
aircraft or other movable structure, or part of any such thing.
(6) “Remains” includes any trace or sign of the previous existence of the thing in
question.
(7) It is immaterial whether—
(a) a building, structure or work is above or below the surface of the land,
(b) a site is above or below water.
(8) This section has effect for the purposes of section 1.

3 Meaning of “deals in”

(1) A person deals in an object if (and only if) he—
(a) acquires, disposes of, imports or exports it,
(b) agrees with another to do an act mentioned in paragraph (a), or
(c) makes arrangements under which another person does such an act or
under which another person agrees with a third person to do such an
act.
(2) “Acquires” means buys, hires, borrows or accepts.
(3) “Disposes of” means sells, lets on hire, lends or gives.
(4) In relation to agreeing or arranging to do an act, it is immaterial whether the
act is agreed or arranged to take place in the United Kingdom or elsewhere.
(5) This section has effect for the purposes of section 1.

4 Customs and Excise prosecutions

(1) Proceedings for an offence relating to the dealing in a tainted cultural object
may be instituted by order of the Commissioners of Customs and Excise if it
appears to them that the offence has involved the importation or exportation
of such an object.
(2) An offence relates to the dealing in a tainted cultural object if it is—
(a) an offence under section 1, or

Page 8 of 9
Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act 2003 (c. 27) 3
(b) an offence of inciting the commission of, or attempting or conspiring to
commit, such an offence.
(3) Proceedings for an offence which are instituted under subsection (1) are to be
commenced in the name of an officer, but may be continued by another officer.
(4) Where the Commissioners of Customs and Excise investigate, or propose to
investigate, any matter with a view to determining—
(a) whether there are grounds for believing that a person has committed an
offence which relates to the dealing in a tainted cultural object and
which involves the importation or exportation of such an object, or
(b) whether a person should be prosecuted for such an offence,
the matter is to be treated as an assigned matter within the meaning of the
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (c. 2).
(5) Nothing in this section affects any powers of any person (including any officer)
apart from this section.
(6) “Officer” means a person commissioned by the Commissioners of Customs
and Excise under section 6(3) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979.

5 Offences by bodies corporate

(1) If an offence under section 1 committed by a body corporate is proved—
(a) to have been committed with the consent or connivance of an officer, or
(b) to be attributable to any neglect on his part,
he (as well as the body corporate) is guilty of the offence and liable to be
proceeded against and punished accordingly.
(2) “Officer”, in relation to a body corporate, means—
(a) a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body,
(b) a person purporting to act in any such capacity.
(3) If the affairs of a body corporate are managed by its members, subsection (1)
applies in relation to the acts and defaults of a member in connection with his
functions of management as if he were a director of the body.

6 Short title, commencement and extent

(1) This Act may be cited as the Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act 2003.
(2) This Act comes into force at the end of the period of two months beginning
with the day on which it is passed.
(3) This Act does not extend to Scotland.

© Crown copyright 2003

Printed in the UK by The Stationery Office Limited

under the authority and superintendence of Carol Tullo, Controller of
Her Majesty’s Stationery OYce and Queen’s Printer of Acts of Parliament

Page 9 of 9