LSE: Legal System & Legal Method Exam Paper

Sophie, a first-year law student, is researching the legal status of cohabiting couples for her dissertation. She finds three sources: (1) a 2019 Court of Appeal decision stating that cohabiting couples have no automatic property rights; (2) a 2021 High Court judgment suggesting such couples should have limited property protection; and (3) a recent Law Commission report recommending legislative reform in this area. Meanwhile, her friend James argues that under European human rights law, cohabiting couples must be treated identically to married couples. Advise Sophie on how she should approach these conflicting sources when constructing her legal argument, applying principles of legal reasoning and the doctrine of precedent.

"The distinction between ratio decidendi and obiter dicta is crucial for the operation of precedent, yet in practice this distinction is often unclear and contested." Critically analyse this statement, examining both the theoretical importance of the ratio/obiter distinction and the practical difficulties in its application.

Marcus is a judge in the Crown Court hearing a complex fraud case. During proceedings, he encounters several interpretive challenges: (1) a statute passed in 1968 uses the phrase 'dishonest appropriation' but Parliament's intentions regarding its scope are unclear; (2) a relevant Court of Appeal decision from 2018 appears to conflict with a more recent Supreme Court judgment on a related point; (3) the defence argues that a European Court of Human Rights ruling requires a particular interpretation of the defendant's rights. Separately, Marcus discovers that a key precedent he initially planned to follow was decided per incuriam, as it failed to consider a relevant statutory provision. Analyse the legal reasoning process Marcus should follow to resolve these interpretive challenges, with particular reference to theories of statutory interpretation and precedent.

"Statutory interpretation has moved beyond mechanical rule application toward a more contextual and purposive approach, but this evolution raises concerns about judicial legitimacy and democratic accountability." Critically evaluate this statement with reference to developments in interpretive theory and judicial practice.