How To Analyse A Law Case

Judgment: Lord Reid

• An oral hearing should happen whenever procedural fairness demands it.

• Procedural fairness goes beyond mere procedure: it stops injustice that arises when a prisoner cannot participate in a decision that directly involves him, and it upholds the rule of law by ensuring that lawmakers hear from those affected by their laws.

• It therefore may be fair to order a hearing even when it won’t assist the Parole Board’s decision.

• Yes, UK law (common law) should satisfy ECHR law. However, human rights law doesn’t end with ECHR. Common law can go beyond.

• The UK Court must therefore ask not just about reasonableness of the decision, but whether the procedure has been fair.

• A prisoner therefore should be granted an oral hearing –if he can show that it would be appropriate.

• Appeal hearings are not a waste of time: ‘procedures which involve an immediate cost but contribute to better decision-making are in reality less costly than they may appear’.

Appeal was granted.

Case Analysis Technique

Questions to consider:

Q. Did Lord Reid have his eye on the repealing the Human Rights Act debate (see previous blog)? [Therefore wanting to grant protection if it were to be removed.]

Q. Is this case trying to combat government concerns for expenses and public justice? [What may be costly in the short term (i.e. an oral hearing), may end up saving money in the long run.]

Hopefully, this sample case report has shown you the structure of what is important when you read a case. It’s important to try and go beyond the text and think about the potential impact of the case, and contextualise it in legal trends. It’s not easy – however, just as Lord Reid states, What is time consuming in the short term – may end up providing dividends in the long run.