Introduction of (Unit Level 4) Legal Methods in UK Assignment
Get free written samples from expert assignment writers and academic writing services in UK.
Every general public on the planet to work appropriately needs specific arrangement of decides that would safeguard the general public and its people, secure their privileges and opportunities and give answers for social issues. Over the course, individuals energetically began to change or coordinate their social orders into states - higher specialists as a superior approach to executing such guidelines. The arrangement of these guidelines before long turned into an arrangement of legitimate standards called the law which has been made and authorized by the State. To get the most noteworthy accuracy and viability regulation started to be particular as per its objective issues and areas of society and therefore arranged and recognized principally as open and private regulation, common and criminal regulation or homegrown and global regulation.
Distinguish between primary, secondary and delegated legislation
The primary regulation is the universal term embracing rule rules approved by the real groupings of the Unified Realm, for instance, Demonstrations of Parliament, Demonstrations of pre-UK Parliaments, Demonstrations of the Scottish Assembly, Proportions of the public Get together for Ribs, Demonstrations of the Northern Ireland Gathering and Church of Britain Estimates passed by the Overall Assembly. Its genuinely customary methodology is inconceivably obfuscated and testing to pass the Demonstration in Parliament. It starts with its depiction as the Bill, for the most share in the Place of Hall in a first analyzing. Consequently, in a moment examining it goes through an very fundamental appraisal and discussion where different changes might be applied. In the last third looking at, the Bill is comfortable without the open door with be moreover different. From that point forward, the Bill goes to the Place of Masters where essentially a practically identical system is practical (Choong, et. Al., 2022).
Such tangled framework and in some cases the abominable assessment of the Bill takes a huge load of time and can make fundamental disasters for the crisis conditions. Likewise, it doesn't get that the Assembly can predict each of the subjects which could emerge with respect to it. Another wantage of such scheme is its costing where the presentation of the new assembling requests a huge load of assets and that it will overall be really expensive particularly when a Bill neglects to be approved and the picked government brings it back for projecting a democratic structure until it gets passed. Regularly these consequences in that the fundamental Bill for the most part moves from the passed Bill since fulfilling each Parliamentary Council should be changed (Loughney, et. Al., 2021).
Curiously, with fundamental guideline, helper guideline is secondary guideline made by the official headquarters confidential the cutoff points set somewhere near the administering body by the by with a comparative real control. The powers to make assistant definitive are ordinarily given or alloted to clerics, public organizations or the Crown - subsequently moreover called designated guideline. Discretionary guideline is mostly made as Legal Instruments and Guidelines and their standard plan is to improve, direct, support and maintain fundamental guideline (Kumar, et. Al., 2019).
The aide rule making process isn't overall so muddled as in principal rule and transitory it isn't the case inauspicious. For the most part, it is made by existence embraced by the named individual, if all else fails, from the super part of information on the Bill; in spite of how now and again the Sovereigns agreement might be required. This brands the rule truly adaptable and quick as the circumstances change or unforeseen issues occur particularly requiring crisis. This way it additionally relieves the Parliament from express discussions concerning point by point specific matters which are everything seen as rather examined with unequivocal specialists from the field what makes the law more exact and strong (Sharapa, 2021).
Delegation was depicted by Black's Law Phrasebook as a demonstration of giving or enabling an individual to follow up in the interest of that individual who gave them that control or to go about as his representative or delegate. Appointed regulation is regulation that is instituted in the United Kingdom not by an Act of Assembly but rather by a priest of government, a designated individual or an office. Authentic Background of The Development Of Managerial Law With Special Reference To Deputized Legislation In United Kingdom (Benzmüller, et. Al., 2020).
Explain the hierarchy within statutory sources and the case law.
The general court advancement and mentioned development is set out under. Note, in any case, that there was a wide investigation of the ordinary court framework in Britain and Grains in 2016,
The Supreme Court
The Supreme Court is the latter court of allure in the UK. It catches demands on unsure characteristics of law of public importance for the entire of the UK correspondingly cases, and for England and Ribs and Northern Ireland in illegal cases. In Scotland, deals can be made exploiting the lower courts in criminal suitcases to the High Court of Justiciary.
The Legitimate Leading group of legal administrators of the Privy Chamber, which contains judges of the Great Court and some elder Republic judges, is the last court of interest for different Ward republics, as well as the UK's abroad districts, Crown conditions and military independent bases.
The Court of Appeal
The Court of Petition and the High Court incorporate the "senior courts" of England. The Court of Appeal is a re-studying court and is confined into two dissections, Criminal and Regular (??????, 2021).
The High Court
The High Court catches the more authentic and multifaceted normal and domestic cases at first event. It covers three divisions: Queen's Seat, Household and Chancery.
The Queen's Seat Separation is great of the three High Court Divisions. Comprised inside it are different master courts: the Head of maritime operations\' office, Business, Business, Advancement and Improvement, and Legitimate Courts.
The Chancery Division oversees alliance rule, affiliation claims, conveyancing, land rule, probate, patent and commitment assessment cases. This Division has three master courts: the Associations Court, the Licenses Court and the Liquidation Court.
England is confined into six routes or expresses topographical locales for the appearance of rule. They are the districts about which the High Court arrives at a excellent about headway. The six routes are: South Eastern, North Eastern, Midland, Northern and Western (Georgiadou, 2019).
The Locale Court
There are nearby 160 locale courts that catch cases inside their geographical catchment region. These courts accomplish collective (non-criminal and non-family) cases. The district law court hears (reliant upon striking cases) cash rights with a value up to and counting GBP100,000 and claims for hurts for discrete injury with a value up to GBP50,000. Cases are routinely held anywhere the respondent resides.
The Family Court
The Family Court was spread out in 2014. It has public ward and given all levels of domestic legitimate manager to sit composed in an identical court.
The Crown Court
The Crown Court be seated in spins around England. This plans with unlawful convict cases that are moved from the Magistrates' Courts, counting certifiable criminal cases.
These judges hear all criminal cases at first event. Less veritable cases and those incorporating youths are attempted in the Magistrates\\\' Courts, as well as a few customary cases.
Explain the impact of the Human Rights Act in UK
In the UK, ordinary open doors are protected by the Common freedoms Act 1998. Public prepared experts, similar to a nearby power or the NHS, should follow the Demonstration. Assuming a public authority has entered your fundamental open doors, you could have the decision to make a move under the Demonstration.
The normal opportunities held inside this guideline rely upon the articles of the European Show on Basic freedoms (Waters, et. Al., 2018).
The Demonstration 'gives further impact' to honors and valuable open doors guaranteed under the European Show. It infers:
- Condemns ought to scrutinize and give effect on various guidelines in a way which is suitable with Show opportunities
- It is unlawful for a public ability to act in a way which is opposite with a Show right.
The Basic freedoms Act safeguards everybody in the UK. It makes no difference if - for instance, you\'re an English tenant, an outcast or a shelter searcher.
Public specialists should follow the Common freedoms Act.
They should regard and guard your ordinary opportunities, beside accepting there\'s a rule which upsets it. The Common freedoms Act says they should act in a manner which is appropriate your fundamental open doors.
Illustrate the operation of literal, golden and purposive rules of statutory interpretation in UK
Rules are made by Parliament; Judges unwind the rules utilizing Legal Understanding. Skilled workers, while attracting up rules endeavor to guarantee they are clear and unambiguous; in any case, objectives can contain expressing with crude implications and with society\\\'s turn of events, old norms, yet at the same time significant, may contain communicating unused in present day. There might be different goofs unpretentious to Parliament and objectives can\\\'t cover each opportunity subsequently; judges should unwind the repercussions of objectives utilizing the Principles of Legal Translation. There are four Principles of Legal Translation, these are the extreme rule, the stunning standard, the wickedness rule and the purposive framework. These guidelines will be examined inside the body of this work. The article will then, at that point, continue onward to consider the three guidelines of language and the associates utilized close by the standards to appear at an objective to the writer\\\'s situation on the perspectives conferred in the above reference (Al-Astewani, 2020).
Analyse the structure of the criminal and civil courts
The court framework in England and Wales can be measured as comprising of 5 levels:
High Court (previously the House of Lords) and the Judicial Group of the Privy Assembly
- Court of Appeal
- High Court
- Crown Court and County Courts
- Justices' Courts and the Tribunals Service
There is a relative law court framework in Northern Ireland and a substitute court framework in Scotland.
Legal Committee of the Privy Council
The Legal Panel of the Privy Chamber is the court of unequivocal attention for Federation nations that have detained requesting to either Her Highness in Board or to the Legal Advisory group. It is in addition the court of unequivocal interest for the High Court of Justiciary in Scotland for issues related with decentralization. Two or three parts of the Legal Council were taken over by the new High Court in 2009 (Wheatle, 2019).
High Court (currently the Place of Rulers)
In 2009 the High Court supplanted the Place of Rulers as the most brought court up in Britain, Ridges and Northern Ireland. Additionally moreover with the Place of Masters, the High Court hears requests from the Court of Allure and the High Court (just in astonishing conditions). It likewise hears requests from the Internal Place of the Court of Meeting in Scotland. Requests are regularly heard by 5 Judges (as of now Rulers of Allure in Standard, or Regulation Masters), however there can be so a lot (Ritz, 2022).
Court of Allure
The Court of Allure contains 2 divisions, the Criminal Detachment and the Common Choice. Choices of the Court of Allure might be tended to the High Court (currently the Place of Rulers).
The Common Detachment of the Court of Allure hears requests about ordinary rule and family esteem from the High Court, from Councils, and certain cases from the District Courts (O'Dea, 2020).
The Criminal Division of the Court of Allure catches requests from the Crown Court.
The High Court contains 3 divisions, the Chancery Division, the Family Division, and the Queen\'s Seat Division. Choices of the Great Court might be tended to the Common Division of the Court of Allure (Gray, 2020).
Analyse the role of the judiciary and the judicial appointment process
Legitimate opportunity is a central goal of most generally sets of regulations, and systems of plan are seen as a huge part to achieve this goal. Judges who are subordinate in some way or one more on the person who picks them may not be relied on to convey fair, incredible decisions, hence harm the realness of the lawfulframework overall. While there is close broad settlement on the meaning of legitimate independence as an issue of theory, generally sets of regulations utilize a wide extent of decision frameworks eventually, often reflecting hardly different starts of opportunity. The assortment of systems of lawful assurance suggests that there is no settlement on the most ideal way to guarantee opportunity (Balaman, et. Al., 2019).
One defense for the assortment is that lawful plan systems also trap different qualities that may be in some strain with the perfect of legitimate independence. For model, plans ought to moreover ensure lawful obligation, the probability that the legitimate chief stay aware of a level of receptiveness to society. An related concern is the representativeness of the legalized chief. Of late, there has been stress in a twosome of communal orders about the sythesis of the lawful chief on ethnic and direction lines. The essential anxiety is that the lawful chief should openly reflect, fairly, the assortment of the overall population where it works. In the event that not value will be viewed as spreading power of one get-together over another. A couple of countries have refreshed their systems of assigning chose actually to ensure more prominent assortment on the seat.
Analyse the function of the jury in criminal trials UK
The limit of the jury is to weigh up the evidence and to close what the affirmed real factors of the case are without a doubt truly happened. The named authority gives the direction to the jury on the huge guideline, which the jury needs to apply to current real factors of the case to show up at a choice. If it is a convict case and the jury has given a choice of at risk, then, the adjudicator will choose reasonable sentence. In like manner cases, juries work is to choose how much money should be allowed in hurts.
The jury in criminal cases
Despite the way that juries are crucial in the policing, they truly deal simply in a minority of the cases. Criminal offenses are organized into three classes. "Rundown" offenses are the minor offenses and less real and are offense simply in the official's courts. For example minor traffic offenses. The most real kind of offenses is "indictable so to speak" which ought to be endeavored in the Crown Court. Between these cutoff points sorts there is another kind of offenses called as "offense notwithstanding." Such cases, as it is clear from the name, can be endeavored either in the official's courts accepting that the adjudicators can here the case and the disputant consents or in the Crown Court. In these cases, the disputant has the honor to request being endeavored in the Crown Court, so either the officials or the respondent can choose being examined in the Crown Court. Jury can endeavor a case in the Crown Court and if the defendant contends not culpable, and the primer returns further, the individual being referred to will be endeavored before a jury. The majority of the crook cases are frame just on the grounds that they are least dead serious and typically devoted, and likewise 95% of the cases are heard in the officials courts, where the juries have no impact (this also recalls those cases for which charged admits in however offenses). Out of the extra 5% of the cases heard in the Crown Court, in larger piece of the cases either respondent yields, so there is no need of a jury or the named power arranges the jury that guideline demands that they clear the disputant. Hence the juries truly pick just around 1% of criminal cases. In any case, of course this 1% totals to 30,000 primers and these are the most real ones went before the court.
Assess the duty and powers of the police.
The center obligation of the police administration is to safeguard the general population by identifying and forestalling wrongdoing. This obligation is laid out in precedent-based regulation (points of reference set by choices of the courts) and the police have both customary regulation and authoritative abilities to execute it.
The utilization of police powers should be viable with common freedoms and equities regulation. Police work force are independently liable for guaranteeing their utilization of their powers is legitimate, proportionate and fundamental (Piroozfar, et. Al., 2019).
Police powers can be gathered into three classifications:
Powers to examine wrongdoing. This incorporates a scope of abilities to gather proof expected to recognize suspects and backing their fair and viable preliminary.
Powers to forestall wrongdoing. This incorporates a scope of abilities to keep public control, forestall hostile to social way of behaving and oversee known wrongdoers/suspects.
Powers to 'discard' criminal cases. These powers permit cops to discard criminal cases beyond court or charge thinks so they can be indicted.
Assess the role of the Crown Prosecution Service UK
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) prosecutes criminal cases that have been explored by the police and other wise relationship in England and Wales. The CPS is free, and make decisions independently of the police and government.
CPS commitment is to guarantee that the ideal individual is charged for the right offense, and to manage liable gatherings consistently.
Agents ought to be fair, objective and independent. While picking whether to arraign a crook case, our lawyers ought to follow the Code for Crown Prosecutors. This plans that to blame a person for a criminal offense, analysts ought to be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to give a reasonable chance of conviction, and that arraigning is in the public interest.
Examine the latest reforms to the civil justice process UK
part from the effect of COVID-19 on the manner by which debate goal is led, which looks set to proceed, perhaps the main advancement expected over the course of the following year is the augmentation of the proper recoverable costs system. The system is supposed to be stretched out to all respectful cases in the most optimized plan of attack up to a worth of £25,000 in harms, and to most other straightforward, quick track cases esteemed at £25,000 to £100,000 in harms gave they meet specific models (see Extension of fixed recoverable expenses (FRC) system). What's more, it appears to be probable that, during 2022, choices will be made in regards to the drawn out execution of the Disclosure Pilot Scheme (see Disclosure Pilot Scheme in the Business and Property Courts: PD 51U), and we are likewise expecting proposition for the change of the passages for administration outside the purview where consent is required (see Reform of doors for administration outside locale where authorization required (PD 6B)).
A portion of the other expected changes to the Civil Procedure Rules will occur because of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee's (CPRC) moving system of rearrangements of the CPR. This remembers the erasure of sections for specific practice headings (PDs) and of whole PDs in different cases, as well as redrafting the pertinent guidelines themselves (determined to improve on them as opposed to rolling out considerable improvements). The impacted principles incorporate CPR 10, 12, 2, 3 and 4 (see Simplification of CPR). Independently, there may likewise be a few further changes to CPR 36 to resolve specific issues that have become exposed because of the manner by which Part 36 offers are now and again utilized practically speaking (see More changes to CPR 36 viable).
The Doctrine of Judicial Precedent
The doctrine of a precedent most important source of the Law of Wales and England. It provides that courts are required to take into consideration and follow the past decisions given by superior or courts of the same level. In other words, the doctrine of judicial precedent requires that when material facts of the two cases are the same it is required that later decision shall be given by courts in consonance with the findings identified by the former courts that are superior in rank and authority (Rafiei, 2019). Precisely the doctrine can be segregated in the following points:
- Courts are abided by the past judgements of the courts of the same hierarchy.
- Courts are not abided to follow the judgements given by the lower courts. Therefore, Court of Appeal is not under obligation to follow the judgements of the High Court.
- Courts are abided by the judgements given by the superior courts. Therefore, one such example is that the court of Appeal is under obligation to follow the judgements of the Supreme Court.
Difference between Binding, Non-Binding and Persuasive Decisions
Binding decisions are those decisions of the courts that are compulsory for the other courts to follow in later decisions when similar facts and circumstances come forth. The rule applies only to those courts that are superior in the hierarchy and not to the lower courts. Thus, even if the judge of the latter case is not agreed with the former decision, they are under obligation to give the same judgement (Brouwer, 2018). This is also known as binding precedent. On the other hand, persuasive decisions are those decisions that are not compulsory for a judge to follow but the findings of the former judgements can be taken into consideration if the judge in the latter case is of the same opinion. Such decisions can be of the courts of the same or lower hierarchy of neighbouring jurisdiction or dicta propounded by the higher courts.
The judgements of the court are comprised of two sections. These sections can be divided into ratio decidendi and orbiter dicta. Ratio decidendi is that section of judgement that is binding on the courts of lower authority to follow (Susanto, 2021). The term is used for the rationale of the case or reasons given by the judge for reaching a particular conclusion. Thus, whenever legal issues that are materially the same are faced by any lower court it is required that they shall follow the former decision. Further, the term orbiter dicta are used for guidance, comments or the rest of the observations that are made by the judge while propounding the judgement or ruling. It is not obligatory for the rest of the courts to follow the orbiter dicta or comments mentioned in the former rulings though they are important (Samanta, 2021).
Ratio Decidendi and Orbiter Dictum of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (1992)
In this case, the issue before the court or House of Lords was to evaluate the extent of the suffering of psychiatric harm that is caused by watching an event that has not resulted in causing physical injury or harm as well as where the sufferer was not physically present at the event.
The ration decendi of this judgement lies in the findings of Lord Oliver while differentiating between secondary and primary victims. It was said that the primary victim is the person who is involved immediately or mediately as a participant whereas the secondary victim is the person who is only an unwilling or passive witness of injuries to other. The claimants can also be classified as secondary victims because they were not within the physical zone of danger.
It is required that secondary victims must fulfil the below-mentioned criteria:
- Close relation of love and affection with the primary victim.
- Must have witnessed the occurrence of the event with their unaided senses.
- Proximity to the event.
- The outcome of the shocking event has resulted in the occurrence of psychiatric injury (McGovern, 2021).
In this judgement, the orbiter dictum of the case provides that the proximity of the accident can be calculated with reference to space and time. It is obvious that the consequence and fact of the negligence committed by the defendant can result in the occurrence of psychiatric injury and in this particular case has resulted in the occurrence of nervous shock. Past experiences have proved that immediate and direct hearing or sight will be unjust and impractical which can be called the aftermath doctrine. In other words, the term can also be referred to as the ones who because of the proximity come close to the scene and are not required to be excluded from the benefit. The analysis of the reinforcement of aftermath situations, it is better to draw the analogy of rescue situations that an individual where they cannot anticipate anything when they come immediately to the scene. Generally, the spouse or parent comes within the scope of duty or foresight.
Mooting can be referred to as oral proceedings where an environment similar to the court is created. The primary purpose of the mooting exercise is to make students familiar with the environment of the court and the manner in which the proceedings take place inside the court and to enhance their advocacy skills of students. Therefore, it can be stated that mooting is important for the overall development of individuals as proficient and good lawyers. Such mooting exercises help students in building their confidence and enhancing their research and writing skills ultimately enhancing their practical knowledge of students (Parsons, 2018).
- The facts of the case show that Harry Pollard, who is the delivery driver of builder merchant has faced a collision and subsequent fire within building premises at the time of delivery to a large construction site. The incident was witnessed by him from the site office and was not present within proximity of the place where the physical danger has taken place. Though he had seen some horrific views such as people are falling from the topmost area of a building and are burning with fire. After facing all such horrific views Pollard has worked off and has made the claim of psychiatric harm against the construction company.
- The plaintiff has made the claim for psychiatric injuries faced by him because of the occurrence of the event due to negligence of the construction company. Taking the plea of McLoughlin v O’Brian 1 AC 410, where the material facts of the case were similar to the events that have taken place in this incident it was pleaded that the damages shall be given to the plaintiff. In this case, the plaintiff has gone to the hospital after she has received the news of a motor accident in that her husband and three children were involved. At the hospital, she was provided with the news that one of her children has died and can saw the rest of her two sons and her husband within a distressing condition because of the immediate impact of the accident. In this case, the lady has claimed that she has suffered psychiatric illness due to experience and is therefore entitled to receive the damages for the same. In this case, the Court of Appeal has provided damages to the lady. The judgement delivered by the house of lords has provided that the duty of the defendant extends to those people as well that come immediately to the place of an accident even if they had not witnessed the situation at the time of its occurrence (Russell, 2019). The situations specified by the house of Lords for claiming compensation include:
- Damages cannot be claimed for loss or grief. However, plaintiffs are entitled to claim for the nervous shock that has resulted because of negligence without addressing the direct impact.
- Plaintiff is also entitled to claim for those nervous shocks that are caused because of nervous shock if the injury was suffered by their near relative.
- There are three classes of people whose claims must be recognised for claiming compensation. These classes are the means due to the shock or injury caused and their proximity with the individual at the accident.
- Any shock is capable of affecting a huge number of people therefore it is required that emphasis must be made only on a certain specified number of people. One of such specified numbers includes close relatives.
- It is required that the factor of proximity must include space and time. The time must be immediate aftermath or immediate with the incident. On the other hand, incident means around and in the place where the incident has occurred. It is required that the shock must have occurred because of hearing or sight regarding the immediate aftermath.
Further, it was argued that the reasonable foreseeability of risk required within the form of psychiatric illness is required for the purpose of attracting the liability of the defendant (Freckelton and Popa, 2018). In the normal incidents of direct physical injuries, the test of reasonable foreseeability is the only test that is required for the determination of liability but as the incidents of psychiatric illness are more subtle it requires special considerations. In the case of Bornhill v Young  AC 92, it was held that such injuries are a secondary form of injuries that takes place after the infliction of physical injuries. Such injuries have the potential to affect the people in close vicinity. Therefore, such people are entitled to claim damages (Allcock, 2019).
- In such situations, the defendant can protect their liability by arguing on the landmark judgement of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire  1 AC 310. In this case, the house of Lords has discussed the two categories of people that suffer damage. Primary victims are those individuals that are directly involved in the event and have gone through the reasonably foreseeable injury. On the other hand, the law has also introduced the concept of a “controlled mechanism” for delimiting the number of people who can recover damages successfully under the heading of the secondary victim. These categories include the following categories:
- Such a person must be reasonably foreseeable or must be a person of ordinary phlegm or normal fortitude and must have suffered a recognisable psychiatric injury because of shock.
- There must be an existence of a close relationship of affection and love amongst the primary and secondary victims.
- The identified or person claiming in secondary victim must be within proximity of time and space of immediate aftermath or relevant event, and the occurrence of psychiatric injury must have been caused by hearing or seeing the event.
- The psychiatric injury must be the outcome of unexpected and sudden shock that is exceptional and horrified in nature (Koch and Adeleye, 2019).
- The defendant can claim in this present situation that Harry Pollard is not entitled to claim damages because he is not covered within the categories specified in the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire  1 AC 310. Harry Pollard is nether connected with the people suffering because of the occurrence of the event because of the relation of love and affection neither he was the person who could be reasonably foreseeable because of the ordinary phlegm or normal fortitude. Therefore, Harry Pollard is not entitled to claim damages in this particular situation.
Evaluation of Claim and Defence of the case situation
The observation of the above-mentioned facts suggests that not each and every person can claim damages after facing some bad events. If such incidents have been appreciated then in such situations will extend the unlimited liabilities after the occurrence of any such events. Thus, only primary victims and some of the secondary victims recognised in the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire can claim compensation. As Harry Pollard is not covered within such category because he was a mere spectator of the horrific event and no such psychiatric injury has been caused he is not entitled to claim damages.
Al-Astewani, A., 2020. To open or close? COVID-19, mosques and the role of religious authority within the British Muslim community: A socio-legal analysis. Religions, 12(1), p.11.
Allcock, M., 2019. A Corrective Justice Justification for Considering the Response of the Hypothetical Person of an ‘Ordinary Level of Susceptibility’when Assessing Reasonable Foreseeability in Case Involving Negligently Inflicted Psychiatric Injury. Tort Law Review, 26, pp.60-82.
Balaman, ?.Y., Scott, J., Matopoulos, A. and Wright, D.G., 2019. Incentivising bioenergy production: Economic and environmental insights from a regional optimization methodology. Renewable energy, 130, pp.867-880.
Benzmüller, C., Parent, X. and van der Torre, L., 2020. Designing normative theories for ethical and legal reasoning: LogiKEy framework, methodology, and tool support. Artificial intelligence, 287, p.103348.
Brouwer, R., 2018. On the Meaning of System in the Common and Civil Law Traditions: Two Approaches to Legal Unity. Utrecht J. Int'l & Eur. L., 34, p.45.
Choong, E.K.M., Gallagher, J.E. and Patel, R., 2022. Methodology and outcome of trials involving older adults in UK care homes: A rapid review. Gerodontology.
Freckelton, I. and Popa, T., 2018. ‘Recognisable Psychiatric Injury’and Tortious Compensability for Pure Mental Harm Claims in Negligence Saadati v Moorhead  1 SCR 543 (McLachlin CJ and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner, Gascon, Côté, Brown and Rowe JJ). Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 25(5), pp.641-652.
Georgiadou, M.C., 2019. An overview of benefits and challenges of building information modelling (BIM) adoption in UK residential projects. Construction Innovation.
Gray, C.A., 2020. Researching consent in veterinary practice: The use of interpretive description as a multidisciplinary methodology. Methodological Innovations, 13(3), p.2059799120961614.
Koch, H. and Adeleye, N., 2019. Post-traumatic Stress Disorder-Contemporary Analysis of Medico Legal Evidential Issues. The Expert Witness Journal, (28).
Kumar, V., Sezersan, I., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Gonzalez, E.D. and Moh’d Anwer, A.S., 2019. Circular economy in the manufacturing sector: benefits, opportunities and barriers. Management Decision.
Loughney, S., Wang, J., Bashir, M., Armin, M. and Yang, Y., 2021. Development and application of a multiple-attribute decision-analysis methodology for site selection of floating offshore wind farms on the UK Continental Shelf. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 47, p.101440.
McGovern, D., 2021. ‘DEARNESS, NEARNESS, AND HEAR-NESS’: HOW DOES THE REQUIREMENT OF PROXIMITY IN PSYCHIATRIC HARM LIMIT SECONDARY VICTIMS?.
O'Dea, X.C., 2020. Perceptions of Chinese top-up students transitioning through a regional UK university: a longitudinal study using portrait methodology (Doctoral dissertation, University of Hull).
Parsons, L., 2018. Competitive Mooting: An Opportunity to Build Resilience Skills for Legal Practice. Australian Journal of Clinical Education, 4(1), p.6784.
Piroozfar, P., Farr, E.R., Zadeh, A.H., Inacio, S.T., Kilgallon, S. and Jin, R., 2019. Facilitating building information modelling (BIM) using integrated project delivery (IPD): A UK perspective. Journal of Building Engineering, 26, p.100907.
Rafiei, M., 2019. Ensuring Uniformity of Judicial Precedent: Exploring Fundamental Issues. Judgment, 19(98), pp.101-124.
Ritz, V., 2022. Towards a Methodology for Specifying States’ Mitigation Obligations in Line with the Equity Principle and Best Available Science. Transnational Environmental Law, pp.1-26.
Russell, E.J., 2019. The bystander and the bin lorry: Weddle v Glasgow City Council considered. Scots Law Times, 2019(31), pp.117-125.
Samanta, D., 2021. Difference between obiter dicta and ratio decidendi. Pen Acclaim Journal, 15, pp.1-5.
Sharapa, I., 2021. Modern problems and methodology of legal science: the curriculum of the institution of higher education in the academic discipline for the specialty 1-24 80 01" Jurisprudence".
Susanto, A.F., 2021. Relation of Power in Ratio Decidendi. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 7(10), pp.798-807.
UZBEKISTAN, N. and Isroilovich, U.I., 2020. METHODOLOGY OF PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCE AND ACTIVITY. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational Sciences Vol, 8(2).
van der Burg, W., Kestemont, Handbook on Legal Methodology. A Review.
Waters, B., Krishnadas, J., Ashton, J., McConnell, P. and Jones, E., 2018, March. CLOCK as a transformative methodology; exploring how the CLOCK initiative has transformed theory and practice in legal education. In Association of Law Teachers' Annual Conference 2018: Diversity and Innovation.
Wheatle, S.S., 2019. Common Law Constitutionalism Through Methodology. McGill Law Journal/Revue de droit de McGill, 65(2), pp.341-377.
??????, ?.?., 2021. Modern problems and methodology of legal science: electronic training and methodological complex for undergraduates in the specialty 1-24 80 01 Jurisprudence.