Overview of Hart’s Analysis of Legal Rules
Part A:
The rules for the new group as well as new tribe can be enforced with the help of Hart’s analysis within the legal system of Australia. Hart has divided the rules into two main categories which include primary rules as well as secondary rules. Primary rules require specific actions that help to generate obligations of duties. As per the primary rules, a citizen is obliged to follow the rules of their tribe in some specific manner (Turner and Trone, 2017). These rules have the moral obligations as well as systematic quality that enable the people to follow the moral values in order to make demand insistent for the conformity. These rules also enforce etiquette rules and speech rules that help to maintain social life within the community which also avoid any conflict that can be raised in between the new group and their tribe as per the given context.
Further, secondary rules help to set the procedures or legal processes using which all primary rules could easily be enforced, modified or introduced within the legal system. These rules are considered as significant rules for the society and without these rules; society will face severe threats or challenges in their lives. Without the secondary rules, there will be so many challenges as analysed by Hart which includes,
- There will not any systematic method to create rules for the society that will create the uncertainty about the objectives or purposes for the rules.
- Without these, legal system will become static in nature that makes changes within the rules to be occurred organically (Turner et al, 2016).
- Inefficiencies will be raised without a predefined adjudication method over the fact that actually rules are broken or not under the legal system.
All the above problems or challenges can be overcomes or remedied using the different rules including adjudication rules, change rules as well as recognition rules with reference to the Australian legal system.
Hart’s analysis is one of the major contributions in enhancing the modern legal system of Australia. Hart’s analysis on the legal system is mainly based on two categories which includes primary rules as well as secondary rules. In order to enforce the above rules, different methods have been used in the Australian legal system for reducing the challenges or issues as per Hart’s. The legal system of any country mainly based on three concepts of Hart’s. This includes change rules, recognition rules as well as adjudication rules (Thampapillai et al, 2015). All the three rules play their significant role in establishing significant legal system. These rules are important aspect of the secondary rules as described by Hart which mainly help to set the procedures or legal process through which different primary rules could be easily introduced, modified or enforced within the legal systems.
Recognition rules are formulated to counter the uncertainty as well as vagueness for the traditional laws. This rule mainly provides some explicit aspect or criteria in order to determine the significance for the primary rules as described by the Hart’s analysis. It is also considered as the most significant rules among all the three rules as described in the concepts of Hart. This rule mainly identifies the legal status for the different constitutional documents, common laws, parliament acts as well as other different sources for the legal authorities (Clarke et al, 2017). This mainly existed in the complex form but concordant by nature, practice for the courts, private persons or officials in order to identify laws using the specific criteria. These types of rules are not generally in the written form with reference to the legal system of Australia. At the same time, this also defines the validity for the different laws in the Australian legal system.
Primary Rules and their Importance
Change rules are significant during the invention, extinction as well as amendment of different primary rules. This also defines different process or procedures for amending or changing the rules in the legal systems. These types of rule are mainly used in the conditions of evaluation that is also called as correspondence for the conduct of order in legal manner under the system. Judicial activities and court ruling are some of the important examples for the change rules within the Australian legal system. This type of rules can be private or public depends on the legal conditions as per Hart’s criteria. The rule also defines the ways by which changes in the laws could be made under the legal standards or process.
Adjudication rules are also significant aspect for the Hart’s analysis through which society, culture, jurisdiction or territory may ascertain regarding the fact when there would be violation or breach and at the same time, also prescribe remedial measures in order to deal with the legal issues or challenges (Turner et al, 2016). This rules mainly focused to set judicial institutions like courts in order to determine guilt or to interpret the statutes.
On the basis of Hart’s analysis, Australian legal system generally compassed with several features that make it more unique and reliable among the citizens. This includes,
- The legal system of Australia is one of most unique and common law system all across the world.
- The legal system of Australia is adversarial system which provides equal opportunities to the citizens to protect their legal as well as moral rights (Turner et al, 2016).
- The legal system is also consists of specialized hierarchy for the courts which enable to protect moral as well as social rights of the citizens whether from Australia or any other country across the globe.
Further, this also describes other features as well which includes moral rules feature that is the notion for obligation or laws. The legal system enables the individual to follow the moral rules in order to make demand insistent for the conformity (Thampapillai et al, 2015). In addition, the legal system is also encompassed with systematic quality which generally depends over secondary as well as primary rules as described in Hart’s analysis for the legal rules. This system also enforces speech and etiquette rules that help to maintain social like within the community as witnessed from the legal system of Australia.
Australian Contract Laws is evidenced by the common law in Australia that is concerned to the interest protection of consumer in case of any disputes and matters of conflicts between the two parties. Basically, Australian contract law is evidenced from the English legal system that provokes to the responsibilities and duties of two partners in terms of contract principles that enforce the parties to fulfill the promises of underlie contract (Humanrights, 2013). Under the Australian contract law there are two major problems that are encountered by the parties such as accessibilities and uniformities under the variant consideration of contract law while following the general principals of contract.
Secondary Rules and their Importance
In this part, the issue is raised for the genuine consent of parties to enter into the contract and perform the duties according to the agreement of contract law under the statutory legality system of Australia constitution (Lawsociety, 2012). Many times it becomes an issue between the parties where one party does not take any confirm assent of against party who is ready to perform the contractual binding.
Case: Rogers v Whittaker (1992) is related to the genuine consent in which a health professional and patient are involved. It dictates that the health professional has not performed his duty to inform the patient about the risk due to the treatment and he has not taken any consent from the patient (Australiancontractlaw, 2016).
Contract law is a rule under the legal system of Australian statutory law which integrates the interest of two parties for performing duties and responsibilities for the result of successful accomplishment of perceived contact under the legal procedure of
Contract law is concerned to the five principals that are the legal boundation for parties to come under the law of contract and these five characteristics of laws are considered the roots for law formation and come into a contract through performing duties of a party. Five principals of contract law are as agreement, consideration, and intention to create legal relations, capacity and formalities. Where, agreement is the first one that includes the formation of a legal contract under the legal statutory body of Australia, it consist two aspects as offer and acceptance by the mutual co-ordination of both parties. Second is consideration which insists the monetary transaction for the exchange of service and products between the two parties because without worth full exchange the principal is dumped by the legal system.
Under the genuine consent of both the parties to involve in an agreement to perform liabilities in order to successful contract law is essential to being informed with every action.
Given case of genuine consent of the parties to enter into the contract or not is termed as issue for the parties where one party has involved another party to proceed under legal process. In order to outcome, court applies the principals of contract law to perform the duties of default party.
The Australian court apply the contract law in relation to the conflicts arises between the parties, where one party is not performing the duties that leads to the successful contract. As per the court decision, parties are bound to perform the responsibility and action that is misleader by party with the intention to come into contract and being active partner. On the other hand, contract may also be discharged by the several reasons like, agreement, breach and frustration of one party, if it is proved by the high court of Australia under the provision of high court.
Introducing and Enforcing Rules of Constitution for a New Group
Australian high court applied the consideration of genuine consent over the health professional in the case of Rogers v Whittaker (1992), to once inform the parties that the particular treatment may be risky for your body and can influence its health to creating else disease (Lawhandbook, 2013). High court said that the health professional has not performed his duty to awaking the patient about the attached risk.
Conclusion:
On the basis of above case of Rogers v Whittaker (1992), it is concluded that the health professional is responsible for any injury of patient. If the client has not felt any health issues than its warning to take any decision of providing medicine or treating with the fully informed and consent of against party.
In the given case of Ram (Coal Mine Owner) Betty (User), it is contracted that the Ram would supply the 400 tons of coal to Betty for ten years which is starting from 2014 to 2024. Basically, Betty uses the coal in his steal works. The contract was proceeding easily but after two years of contact, problem occurred with the coal mine business due to heavy rain. Further, the Ram was unable to supply for the coals to Betty after 31sy July 2016 because the mines are flooded due to rain and the supply of coals cannot be made from August to December. Regarding to this, Ram (Coal mines owner) has informed the Betty that due to the reasonable issues he was unable to supply for the coals.
In the case of Gold Group Properties Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd has happened same, where Gold Group Properties was unable build flats due to the economic downward in market price of property and contract was terminated by the frustration (Lexology, 2010).
Under the contractual binding, there are some legal obligations that are need to be determined while contracting with another party to being applicable for the liability and duty to perform. Under this case, the principal of mutual obligation arises in which the both of the parties are responsible to perform his or her duties as per the contract legal formation. Along with this, the contract has also the principal of valid enforceable; under this offerer and ofree should treat the agreement consideration to perform arisen liabilities.
Valid enforceable contract is the mutual contractual formalities between the parties and law enforces the parties to come over the liabilities and perform the duties in concern to the valid enforceable contract. An enforceable contract, as per the legal boundation should be valid under this all the formalities have been done according to the contractual agreement.
Valid enforceable contract is considered the legal boundation of both parties to perform the duties of as per the contract (Bailey, 2016). At the same time, Betty can appeal to the court for the not performing of duty by the Ram but under these circumstances of heavy rain contractor is not able to perform his duties and he cannot be bound. Betty can terminate the contact with the Ram if she has essential supply for coals in their steal works or he can contract with the other party for the supply of coals. In this case the rule of termination of contract by frustration would take place as one party (Ram) is unable to perform his duties under the unforeseen circumstances and court cannot bind to the Ram to make the availability for coal under this situation.
In the case of Gold Group Properties Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd, the rule of termination of contract due to the frustration took place and contract was breached.
Conclusion
On the basis of case evaluation, it can be stated that the Ram is not able to perform his duties due to the heavy rain and the contract was valid and enforceable but Betty cannot enforce the Ram to perform his liabilities. It is also concluded that the contract would be terminated by the frustration because of reasonable circumstances Ram was unable to perform the legal boundation.
References
Australiancontractlaw, (2016) Cases. Available at: https://www.australiancontractlaw.com/cases.html (Accessed: September 01, 2017).
Bailey, J. (2016) Construction Law. USA: CRC Press.
Clarke, M., Hooley, R., Munday, R., Sealy, L., Tettenborn, A. and Turner, P. (2017) Commercial Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. UK: Oxford University Press.
Humanrights, (2013) Common law rights, human rights scrutiny and the rule of law. Available at: https://www.humanrights.gov.au/common-law-rights-human-rights-scrutiny-and-rule-law (Accessed: September 01, 2017).
Lawhandbook, (2013) Consent. Available at: https://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch29s02.php (Accessed: September 01, 2017).
Lawsociety, (2012) Australian Government Review of Australian Contract Law. Available at: https://www.lawsociety.com.au/cs/groups/public/documents/internetyounglawyers/644777.pdf (Accessed: September 01, 2017).
Thampapillai, D., Tan, V., Bozzi, C. and Matthew, A. (2015) Australian Commercial Law. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Turner, C. and Trone, J. (2017) Australian Commercial Law, 31st edition. Australia: Thompson Reuters
Turner, C., Trone, J. and Gamble, R. (2016) Concise Australian Commercial Law. Australia: THOMSON LAWBOOK Company.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
