Common Law versus Statues – an answer to S24?Make Text Bigger
Last night I googled ‘My Common Law Rights to earning a Living’ and came across this Beginners Guide to Common Law versus Statutes/Legislation and Acts of Parliament. Naïve as I am to the ways of government I had no idea how Statutes were used for the benefit of minority groups!
I appreciate it is not written by a solicitor but it poses a question……
Can a landlord refuse to consent to Section 24 on the grounds that the Statute is preventing him/her from earn a living in his/her chosen field of business? HMRC would take him/her to court whereupon s/he requests a Jury (I believe Common Law cases are taken to the Queen’s Bench) – which is his/her Right. The Jury, seeing the unfairness of the Statue will hopefully find him/her not guilty. As you will read, the Jury has the highest authority in the land (unless government has changed this since 2011!) and if the landlord is found not guilty then the Case overrules Section 24 and the Statute is no longer legal.
From my limited knowledge of Common Law it is my understanding that whilst in Court and being tried under Common Law the Prosecutor may try to trick the defendant into using terminology that immediately brings them under Statutory Rules and the case can be lost on those grounds therefore the landlord would need to be fully briefed in Common Law.
Is this a way forward? Who wants the job?
Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.