- This topic has 7 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by
.
- Posts
1.liam is convicted of a criminal offense by the magistrate’s court.
if liam has ground to appeal, which court will the case move to next?
-crown court
-high court
-court of appeal
-supreme court
why is the answer ‘b’? i mean i have known all along that appeals are next heard in crown courts for criminal case.2. certain contracts may be made orally but are not enforceable unless they are evidenced in writing. which of the following contracts must be evidenced in writing?
-a lease for more than three years
-a conveyance
-a contract of guarantee
-a promise not supported by considerationas far as i know all these options should be evidenced in writing as they are examples of deeds. why is the answer’c’ when it could easily be ‘b’? also isn’t a contract of guarantee a form of deed?.
I agree with you for question 1 – my answer would also have been Crown Court
For question 2, have you realized that the question is asking about “being evidenced in writing” and not simply “being in writing”?
Okay but doesn’t high court sometimes does act as an appellate court for magistrates? I encountered a similar question elsewhere in BPP and there the answer stated that had there been an option available for high court alongside crown courts we would choose high court’s queen bench division.
Also I get that it is talking about being evidenced in writing. Although I am not sure what exactly the difference is. Even if this is the case, contract of guarantee and contracts of land must always be evidenced in writing. Why are we opting for ‘C’ then?
Thank you.
A contract for the sale of land “must be in writing”
It is not sufficient for there merely to be written evidence of an oral contract – the contract itself must be in writing
From the internet:
“There are four mechanisms under which a decision of a magistrates’ court may be challenged:
reconsideration by the same magistrates’ court;
appeal to the Crown Court;
appeal to the High Court of Justice (Queen’s Bench Division) by way of case stated; and.
judicial review in the High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)”OK?
Nope. Not okay.
This is just not making sense to me. Especially the ‘evidenced in writing’ one.
But Thank you so much for helping me out.
I have an exam on 3rd of October. Hopefully wont be tested on these topics.I’ll try again!
A contract that needs to be in writing is … a written contract. Sit down with the other party, write out an agreement that you are both happy to be bound by, sign it (probably) and there you have a written contract
A contract that needs to be evidenced in writing is where you sit down with the other party, discuss back and forth until you reach a consensus that you are both happy with … but nothing is yet in writing
Go back home and write out the major elements of this agreement that you have thrashed out. Probably even send a copy to the other party
And there you have an oral agreement that is evidenced in writing … so much more persuasive than a bare oral agreement but arguably less persuasive than a formal written contract signed by both you and the other party
Is that any better?
(Good luck on Thursday)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.