Understanding UK Law: Key Variations in Legal Systems

Let’s talk about understanding the UK Legal System. We want to turn what can seem a jumbled mess of different jurisdictions, decisions and processes into something much clearer.

So to help you along, we’ve discussed the history of law in the United Kingdom, the different courts in England and Wales, examined the devolved systems of Scotland and Northern Ireland and explored how decisions are made in cases.

If you have questions, which you probably will after reading all this, get in touch with our advisors today using the details given here:

Call us on 020 3870 4868.
You can also contact us online by completing this form.
Or, open the live chat window on your screen now.

Understanding The UK Legal System

The justice system and the constitution of the UK have evolved organically over the last 1000 years, with our justice system developing under what is known as “common law.” This means the decisions of judges influence the decisions of judges in future cases, referred to as a precedent. The net result of all this means no Act of the UK Parliament is superior to any other, and the interpretation of those Acts is done on a case-by-case basis.

How Is The UK Legal System Divided?

Another consequence of this case-by-case approach without a codified constitution and written criminal code is some very blurred boundaries between the different branches of the state. Let us explain.

A country will typically have 3 branches of government and the UK is no exception. These are:

The Executive: This is our government, they make decisions on how the country is run and how laws are enforced.
The Legislature: The body that passes laws. In the UK, this is the Houses of Parliament, The Commons and the Lords.
The Judiciary: Law courts interpret the laws that Parliament passes and apply these decisions to matters brought before them.

This is where the blurring comes in. Every member of our government also sits in the legislature. The Prime Minister and their Cabinet are all sitting Members of Parliament (MPs) or Peers in the House of Lords and are therefore directly involved in passing legislation. The Justice Secretary is also the Lord Chancellor and is therefore, on paper at least, in charge of the entire Judicial branch. This means that 1 person is a sitting member of all 3 branches of government.

That being said, the binding principle of UK law-making is parliamentary sovereignty, meaning the decisions of the House of Commons are (in theory) superior to all other forms of law. We fully appreciate just how tricky this can be to understand.

The UK’s Separate Legal Systems

In addition to some murky lines between the 3 branches of our government, the devolution agreements in the UK mean we actually have 3 separate legal systems. We’re going to break these down here:

England & Wales

England & Wales operate under the English Legal System. We explored the origins of this system above. The defining feature of the legal system in England is the idea of common law, where the decisions of judges past guide decisions in the future. While judges cannot overrule parliament, case law nonetheless has considerable influence on how our laws are applied in practice.

Scotland

Scotland’s judiciary has always been independent from that of England. Scottish courts survived both the Union of the Crowns in 1603 and the Act of Union in 1707 and therefore evolved separately from their southern neighbours.

One unique feature of the Scottish Legal System is the use of sheriff courts for hearing civil claims. The sheriff courts are roughly equivalent to magistrates’ courts, although a sheriff is usually a qualified legal professional, rather than a trained volunteer.

Northern Ireland

The Good Friday Agreement and Northern Ireland Act 1998 cemented Northern Ireland’s status as a devolved authority, with the NI Assembly having authority over domestic matters including education, healthcare, local government and housing. While this has given Northern Ireland substantial autonomy, the Northern Irish judicial system has many parallels with that of England and Wales, including a similar court hierarchy.

Criminal Law Vs Civil Law

Criminal Law vs Civil Law. What do these words mean? What are the differences? And which is handled by which court? Let’s take a look.

Civil cases are where there is a dispute between 2 or more parties. This can include individual persons, businesses and other organisations. Personal injury, medical negligence and data breach claims are all civil matters. Most of the time, civil cases are settled out of court, but if the dispute does go to trial, it will usually be heard in the County Courts.

A criminal hearing is what usually comes to mind when someone says “trial”, and such trials are often the subject of courtroom dramas. Instead of being between 2 or more entities, a criminal trial is between the Crown, represented by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the accused. You’ll see criminal court cases written in the format of “R vs Jones”, meaning the Crown against whoever is on trial.

All criminal cases begin in the magistrates’ court, but more serious criminal matters are heard in the Crown Court. A jury will be called in the Crown Court to decide a verdict, whereas in magistrates’ courts the decision is made by the judge.

The Court Hierarchy In The UK

The court hierarchy within the UK legal system is, for the most part, pretty clear-cut. We talked about the magistrates’ and the Crown Court in the previous section, but those are just two of the many types of courts we have in the UK. Below, we have set out the structure of the court system, highlighting the functions each court performs.

Magistrates’ Courts

Magistrates Courts hear minor criminal cases, as well as some civil matters, including family cases. Depending on the severity of the case, it will either be presided over by a magistrate or a District Judge. There is no jury in the magistrates’ court.

In criminal cases, a magistrate can impose fines, community orders and short prison sentences. They can also send the claim to the Crown Court if it’s serious enough

The County Courts

County Courts deal with purely civil matters where individuals or organisations are suing another for an infringement of their rights. This can include all personal injury claims, recovering debts and landowners suing for trespass. While most civil cases are heard at a County Court, those involving large sums of money or cases that are particularly complicated will be heard in the High Court.

The Crown Court

The Crown Courts handle the most serious criminal matters. There are multiple crown courts across the country, although the best known of these is the Central Criminal Court in London, more commonly referred to as the Old Bailey.

Cases can end up in the Crown Court in 4 different ways:

They are serious “indictable only” offences, such as murder and assault, that can only be heard in the Crown Court.
“Either way” offences that can be presented before a magistrate, but the defendant exercises their right to a jury.
Cases that were heard in magistrates’ courts but have been escalated to the Crown Court for Sentencing.
The Crown Court also acts as an appeals court, meaning persons convicted in the magistrates’ courts can appeal the decision in the Crown Court.

The High Court

The High Court is both a trial court and an appeals court. As we said above, complex civil matters or cases that involve large sums are heard in the High Court. But if a party wishes to appeal a decision made by a county court, then this appeal will go to the High Court.

There are 4 divisions within the High Court, and what type of claim you are making will dictate which division it is heard in. These Divisions are:

The King’s Bench Division: for civil disputes relating to contract and tort (civil wrongs) claims that are too complex for county courts.
The Family Division: A limited number of serious family disputes are held in the High Court.
The Chancery Division: Primarily concerned with intellectual property, competition and insolvency cases.
The Business and Property Courts: commercial, property and technology disputes concerning both domestic and international entities.

Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal is the highest of the 3 senior courts of England and Wales and deals exclusively with appeals. It has both Criminal and Civil divisions to hear appeals from the lower courts and tribunals.

Because of its seniority, its decisions are often used as precedents. This means that the judges in lower courts will refer to previous decisions from the Court of Appeal when issuing their judgments.

The Supreme Court Of The United Kingdom

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (UKSC) was created by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA). Prior to this, the House of Lords was the final appeal court and the most senior judges in the country, the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, were sitting members of the House of Lords, which did nothing to help the blurring of the separation of powers.

The CRA set up a Supreme Court for the entire UK, and removed the Lord Chancellor as the most senior judge in the country, as well as their position as the Speaker of the House of Lords.

The Supreme Court is fully independent of the other branches of government, with its own systems for appointments, budget and staff. The UKSC is the highest appeal court in the country, and its rulings set precedents for all lower courts. Despite the devolved nature of the UK legal system, the UKSC is the final court of appeal within the UK legal system. This means they hear cases from every devolved jurisdiction as well as England and Wales.

We should point out that, for the sake of clarity, we have not covered the different types of tribunals, such as for employment or immigration matters, the family court or the various divisions of the business and property courts.

The Role Of Solicitors And Barristers

The role of solicitors and barristers within the UK is quite different, but both serve important functions. You’ve likely heard these terms before, but are perhaps unsure what they do. We’ve summarised these roles below.

Solicitors

Solicitors are officers of the courts and have undergone rigorous training and qualifications in order to provide legal services. They have the right to conduct litigation, probate activities and in some cases, appear before judges in courts, something that is referred to as the higher rights of advocacy.

Most of the time, when making a claim, it’ll be a solicitor who represents you. They’ll handle a range of tasks, including calculating compensation figures, interviewing witnesses, helping you collect evidence and carrying out the Pre-Action Protocols. If your claim ends up going to trial, the solicitor will instruct a suitable barrister to take on the claim.

Barristers

Barristers are specialist lawyers who have specialist training in advocacy, meaning they present cases in courtrooms. Like solicitors, they undergo a rigorous qualification process. Barristers are often self-employed and work out of chambers, choosing which claims they take on.

Companies may also hire a barrister exclusively to be their legal representative, referred to as an “in-house counsel.” Senior barristers who have demonstrated several years of knowledge and experience within their particular area of practice may be appointed as King’s/ Queen’s Counsel (KC/QC). This is a process informally known as taking silk.

Judges And The Judiciary

As we said above, the CRA really shook things up in the Judiciary. Prior to these reforms, judges were formally appointed by the Lord Chancellor, a government minister. While the Lord Chancellor acted on the advice of senior members of the judiciary, criticisms were levelled that a political entity should not have sole responsibility for appointments to what was supposed to be an independent branch of the government.

So, the CRA got rid of all that, stripped back the powers of the Lord Chancellor and introduced the Judicial Appointments Commission. The UK legal system is one of open competition where candidates put themselves forward, rather than being at the sole discretion of a single government minister. The Commission are bound by specific statutory mandates to uphold principles of meritocracy and ensure the pool of candidates reflects wider society.

Organisation Of The Judicial Appointments Commission

The Board of Commissioners is organised as follows:

14 members from a range of backgrounds to ensure a suitable breadth of knowledge, expertise and experience.
- 6 members must be judicial members, with 2 of those being tribunal judges.
- 2 professional members with differing qualifications.
- 5 lay members with no legal qualifications. The Chairperson is always a layperson.
- 1 non-legally qualified judicial member.

The legal qualifications:

A barrister in England and Wales.
A solicitor of the Senior Courts of England and Wales.
A fellow of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives.

These rules are designed to ensure the Commission has both judicial and layperson expertise, therefore keeping the selection pool as open as possible. A layperson means someone without specialist knowledge, in this instance, someone from outside the legal sphere.

All these reforms, the selection process and getting a range of backgrounds, views and areas of expertise are designed to uphold the independence, integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

The Three Is

The Three Is of Judicial Officer Holders are: independence, integrity and impartiality. These form part of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 2003 from the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

Judicial independence: The judiciary should uphold its independence, functioning separately to the other branches of government. This extends to both the individual conduct of judges and wider institutional aspects.
Impartiality: Both judicial decisions and the process by which those decisions are made should not be influenced by external factors. Cases are to be judged on their respective facts alone.
Integrity: Integrity means upholding the expected standards of conduct in office. This means being honest, respecting the rule of law and carrying out their duties with due diligence.
Propriety: judges must avoid both impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of their activities. While judges enjoy the rights of ordinary citizens, their office requires them to refrain from expressing those rights in a manner that conflicts with their role as a judge. So if a judge were to join a particular demonstration, their ability to remain impartial in related matters could be called into question.
Equality: any persons before the court should be treated without bias or prejudice. A judge shall also be aware of and understand a diverse society including issues relating to race, sex, religion, disability and sexual orientation.
Competence: a judge shall carry out their role to an expected standard of competence and diligence. Judges are expected to take reasonable steps to educate themselves on matters specific to the cases they are hearing, so they can conduct their official duties competently. There should also be a knowledge of international law and human rights conventions.

How Legal Cases Are Decided

There’s only one term you need to know about when discussing how a case is decided: burden of proof. What this means is there is a legal duty to prove a fact or issue in a given case to the required standard of proof. This burden is always on the claimant or prosecution, depending on the type of claim.

The burden of proof in civil and criminal cases is as follows:

Criminal: The prosecution needs to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of a crime. This includes both intention or recklessness to commit the crime, as well as the action itself.
- “Beyond reasonable doubt” means guilt needs to be virtually certain in order to sentence a defendant.
Civil: The claimant must demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities, that their version of events is what actually occurred.
- A balance of probabilities is where one version of events is shown to be more likely than the other.

For civil claims, there generally isn’t a jury, with the magistrate or judge acting as the sole decider. In criminal trials however, the jury making a decision is much more usual, although it depends on which court the trial is heard in.

A defendant or party who lost the dispute can appeal the decision by escalating the claim to a higher court. Before considering an appeal, legal advice should definitely be sought to ensure you fully understand the appeals procedure and any costs associated with escalating the claim.

Legal Aid And Access To Justice

Access to Justice has long been a concern across multiple jurisdictions. In the UK legal system, litigation has long seemed the arena of the haves, with have-nots being hung out to dry. This is something that extends beyond the cost of making claims, which can be substantial. The most senior court in the country was, prior to 2005, the House of Lords. These senior judges also had legislative powers as life peers. Furthermore, between 1997 and 2003, the Lord Chancellor was also a member a sitting member of the Lords.

Despite considerable reforms since then, the legal profession still has an air of privilege surrounding it. One of the ways this is combated is through legal aid.

Legal aid is essentially income support for claims. Persons whose income and total asset value is below £2,657 per month or are in receipt of qualifying benefits, and have less than £8,000 in savings and assets can apply for legal aid to meet the costs of getting legal advice, representation in court or a family mediation.

What UK Law Can Help With

UK Law can help eligible claimants throughout the claims process. Navigating the court system can be a tricky business, and our expert panel of solicitors can ensure your claim is made within the correct time limit, has all the evidence it needs and is valued both fairly and accurately.

The solicitors we work with offer their services on a strictly No Win No Fee basis with a Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA). This means you won’t incur any solicitor fees at the start of, or during your claim. You will also not pay a fee if you don’t win.

If you win the case, a success fee is deducted from the compensation payout. This fee is capped by law so you’ll keep most of any compensation that is awarded.

Contact Us

To get in touch with our dedicated advisors, use any of the contact information provided here.

Call us on 020 3870 4868.
You can also contact us online by completing this form.
Or, open the live chat window on your screen now.

More Information

Find out more about the types of claims our panel of solicitors can help with below:

You can learn more about claiming personal injury compensation here.
Find out how the solicitors we work with could help you to claim medical negligence compensation with this guide.
Learn when you could be eligible to claim data breach compensation here.

We have also included some external resources you may find useful:

You can learn more about our court structure with this resource from the Judiciary.
Find out more about the work of the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) here.
The Bar Council provide regulatory oversight for all barristers in England and Wales. You can learn more on their website.

Thank you for reading our guide to the UK legal system. We know there’s a lot to take in. If you would like to find out how UK Law could help you seek justice for an injury, case of medical negligence or a breach of your personal data, get in touch with our advisors today. The team are available 24/7 via the details given above.