Topic:
ELS

No# of Pages:
8 pages (2,000 words)

Subject Area:
Law

Paper Style:
Other

No# of Sources Required:
10

Language:
English (U.K)

Details:
use footnotes and oscola referencing plz!!

The word limit for this Assessment 2 is 2000 words. Footnotes and the bibliography are not included within the word limit. Footnotes can only be used for referencing.

Yemshaw v London Borough of Hounslow [2011] UKSC 3 For this Assessment 2

you have to answer a number of questions about the case of Yemshaw v London Borough of Hounslow. This case involves housing law. In addition to the parties to the case there are also two interveners. The interveners are the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and the Women’s Aid Federation of England. The interveners are both represented by barristers. An intervener means a person who is not a party to a case but is an organisation (whether a government department or non-governmental organisation) which has been given permission by the courts to make submissions in a case where the matter to be decided is one of general public importance. The courts will grant such permission if they consider that the intervener has particular knowledge which will assist the court in understanding the relevant issues raised. However the interveners are not parties to the proceedings. Answering the questions on this case accurately requires case-reading, research and drafting skills.

It tests your ability to explain how judges reason their decisions. These questions are intended to enable you to show that you can identify and explain the key issues and principles considered by a judgment and to enable you to demonstrate your research skills and understanding of the English Legal System. You will be able to answer many of the questions from the judgment of the Supreme Court ([2011] UKSC 3) in this case. Some of the questions will require further research to enable you to answer them. You must cite any other sources you use by using the OSCOLA referencing system.

You will lose marks if you do not do so. Your answers to the questions should be in your own words. Do not simply cut and paste large sections of the judgments. If you quote or summarise any parts of the judgments, you must cite the relevant paragraphs using the OSCOLA referencing system. You will lose marks if you do not do so. You do not have to repeat the wording of the questions in your answers but you must clearly indicate which questions you are answering by labelling them appropriately, eg 1), 2), 3), 4) etc. 

ASSESSMENT 2 - QUESTIONS 1) In the Supreme Court, who was: a) the appellant? b) the respondent? 

2) In relation to the appeal to the Supreme Court identify the barristers acting for a) the appellant. b) the respondent.

3) What was the legal issue to be decided by the Supreme Court in this case?

4) Mrs Yemshaw had applied to Hounslow London Borough Council for housing assistance on the ground that she was homeless for the purposes of Part VII of the Housing Act 1996. With reference to the relevant law, explain why Hounslow London Borough Council decided Mrs Yemshaw was not homeless on the facts of her situation.

5) In paragraph [1] of the Supreme Court’s judgment, Lady Hale refers to the decision of the Court of Appeal in this case. She states that the Court of Appeal decided as it did “as it was bound to do so by the earlier case of Danesh v Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council …”. In the context of judicial precedent, explain why the Court of Appeal was bound.

6) In paragraph [2] of the Supreme Court judgment, Lady Hale refers to the 1977 Act being “consolidated”. In the context of legislation, explain what consolidation means.

7) There are numerous references in the Supreme Court’s judgment to the Law Commission. Briefly explain what the Law Commission is and its function.

8) In paragraph [41] of the Supreme Court judgment, Lord Rodger refers back to comments made by Lord Scarman in another case where Lord Scarman discussed “the mischief” at which a section of an Act was aimed. Explain what is meant by “mischief” in the context of the interpretation of a statute.

9) Summarise the factors influencing Lady Hale’s view of the meaning of the word “violence” as set out in paragraphs [19] to [24]. 

10) Explain how Lady Hale and Lord Rodger used a purposive approach to reach their decisions.

11) What was the decision of the Supreme Court in this case and what was the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision on the appellant and upon the respondent?

12) What was the effect of the decision of the Supreme Court in this case on the decision of the Court of Appeal in this case? What was the effect of the decision of the Supreme Court in this case on the Court of Appeal’s decision in Danesh?