We write, we don’t plagiarise! Every answer is different no matter how many orders we get for the same assignment. Your answer will be 100% plagiarism-free, custom written, unique and different from every other student.
I agree to receive phone calls from you at night in case of emergency
Please share your assignment brief and supporting material (if any) via email here at: firstname.lastname@example.org after completing this order process.
No Plagiarism Guarantee - 100% Custom Written
Term 2 Coursework 2016-17
BFL0001 Constitutional and Administrative Law
This coursework is designed to assess the following learning outcomes:
COURSEWORK: Judicial Review and Police Powers
2500. You are recommended to balance your word count equally between the two questions i.e. 1,250 words each
The limit excludes the bibliography or reference list, footnotes, appendices and details of the assessment task.
The penalty for exceeding the word limit is set out in your Course Handbook on Unilearn.
Please check information issued for submission of all courseworks this year.
Title of coursework: Judicial Review and Police Powers
Answer both questions
Judicial Review Scenario:- (1200 words)
1) The (fictitious) Wind Turbines Act 2010, provides as follows:
S1(1) The Minister for the Environment may make grants to any business he thinks fit which produce products related to the construction and installation of wind turbines,
(2) The purpose of the grant is to help reduce the costs of manufacturing and/or installing wind turbines on domestic properties the UK.
(3) Grants must not exceed £30,000 and shall not be less than £1,000.
The Minister has developed a policy, which is published on the website and in promotional literature, that she will, ‘only make grants to businesses that have demonstrated a long term commitment to developing products aimed at reducing the cost of constructing and installing wind turbines, and have demonstrated a good environmental record, which is the aim and objective of the Wind Turbines Act 2010 ’.
The Minister has an annual budget of £3m to use on such grants
Eco Turbine ltd is a business that has been producing Wind Turbines for over 20 years for the domestic market. It has an excellent reputation within the wind turbine industry of producing low cost high quality turbines. However, as a small company it needs a grant to expand to meet the demand for wind turbines. The grant is to be used towards training new staff to construct and install domestic turbines on site, cheaply and quickly. By expanding the company believes it will be able to reduce the costs of turbines further and develop cheaper and more efficient installation methods.
Being confident that the company meets the criteria for a grant they contacted the Ministry about applying for a grant. They were told there should not be any problems with an application which was likely to be favourably considered. However, when they later submitted their application it was returned with a letter stating: Your application will not be considered’. No reasons for this were given.
AB Engineering plc, a multinational company with a poor environmental record was successful in its application for a grant to a develop wind turbines business, a brand new enterprise for the company. The company has no experience of the wind turbine industry but wishes to break into the market as it see a short term opportunity to make money quickly.
The Ministry for the Environment recently stated on its web site that ‘only businesses who were members of ‘The UK Engineering Group’, a large lobby group for engineering companies of which AB Engineering plc is a member, would be considered for grants.
Advise Eco Turbine ltd, who is not a member of ‘The UK Engineering Group’, and wishes to use judicial review to challenge the refusal of their application and the making of a grant to AB Engineering plc. Other than judicial review briefly explain if there is any other way the minister may be held accountable for her actions.
Police Powers Scenario:- (1200 words)
2) At 2 am in the morningWPCHolmes was investigating a burglary at IP Electrics Factory, in which a number of expensive i-pods had been stolen. She drove round the industrial estate where the factory is located and saw Dean Bell, who is known toWPCHolmes, as he has a history of previous convictions for burglary and theft.
WPCHolmes got out of her police car and as she approached Dean he appeared to be out of breath. When asked why, Dean just shrugged his shoulders.WPCHolmes asked Dean what he was doing on the industrial estate at 2 am in the morning, to which he replied ‘it’s none of your business’.
WPCHolmes then asked Dean where he had been and if he knew anything about the burglary. Dean said he knew nothing about the burglary and refused to say where he had been.
WPCHolmes told Dean that she intended to search him and Dean toldWPCHolmes that he was unhappy at being searched, but did allowWPCHolmes to search him.WPCHolmes found several of the missing i-pods from the burglary in Dean`s jacket pocket.
WPCHolmes told Dean to get into the police car so she could take him to the police station to answer some questions. Dean refused soWPCHolmes placed him under arrest and told him to get into the car she continued to question Dean on the way to the police station.
At the police station, Dean was told to wait in the reception. He asked to telephone his wife, who he was worried about as she was 8 months pregnant but this was refused. After about 5 hours, he was interviewed about the burglary. During the interview, which lasted 12 hours without a break, Dean asked several times for access to legal advice but each time this was refused. During the interview, Dean was repeatedly told that if he signed a confession he would be released on bail. Dean was worried about his wife so he signed a confession and was released on bail.
Dean now denies any involvement in the theft.
Advise Dean on the legality of the actions of the police and on the admissibility of the confession and the i-pods as evidence in any subsequent trial.