This coursework is designed to test the following:
1. That the student can critically evaluate the various principles and concepts encountered in the module by using materials illustrating different and competing perspectives.
2. Identify weakness in the material and identify the possibility of reform and new concepts in the future.
3. Rank the relevance and importance of standard arguments based on reliability, validity and significance. Investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for the contradictions.
4. Bring together relevant materials from cases and statutes and identify the most applicable
5. Discuss academic criticism and any relevant Law Commission Reports.
Nature of a Case Study
You should note that a case study is not simply a treatment of the facts and the decision in the case chosen. The candidate must show an awareness of the context of the case. Thus the case study should outline and analyse the state of the law prior to the case. This should include all policy reasons and values underlying the particular area of the law. Then the study should identify what if any deficiencies there were in this area of law which gave rise to this case. The case should be viewed as an attempt to resolve a particular problem and the candidate must assess how successful this solution was. The latter might involve a treatment of how the case has been dealt with in later decisions. The student should look to identify any remaining difficulties and offer some suggestions on how they might be resolved by looking at academic suggestions.
You are advised to read case studies in any relevant journal to appreciate the range of styles used in such an undertaking.
Case List
Barclays Bank v Quistclose [1970] AC 567
Blackwell v Blackwell [1929] AC 318
Boardman v Phipps [1967] 2 AC 46
Crown Prosecution Service v Piper [2011] EWHC 3570
Re Denley?s DT [1969] 1 Ch 373
Dingle v Turner [1972] 1 All ER 878
Hunter v Moss [1994] 1 WLR 452
McPhail v Doulton [1970] 2 WLR 1110
Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities Trust [1951] AC 297
Oughtred v IRC [1959] 3 All ER 623
Pennington v Waine [2002] 1 WLR 2075
Re Rose [1952] Ch 499
Sen v Headley [1991] Ch 425
Stack v Dowden [2007] 2 WLR 831
Target Holdings v Redferns [1996] 1 AC 421
Thorner v Major [2009] 1 WLR 776
Tinsley v Miligan [1994] 1 AC 340
Re Vandervell?s Trust (No.2) [1974] 3 All ER 205
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]