The difference between the facts of a case and the law which is applied to them is assumed to be clear and simple. Beginners in law are asked to briefcases by separating the facts from the law. Appellate courts had asked lawyers to confine oral argument to the facts and let the court to get the law from the briefs. Every client supposes that he knows the facts of his case, and the lawyer supplies law.
Legal disputes arise from certain situations, and the difference between law and fact is extremely important in common law jurisdictions. legal terms, Eg a dispute between two contracting parties. While law refers to the definite rules that decide how the facts will be viewed by the courts. A court may separate facts and laws to distinguish them. In the common law systems, questions of fact focus on the actual actions of a case that may be examined by a jury. They are issues that are material to the product of the case and requires an explanation of conflicting views on the factual circumstances surrounding the case. Questions of law distress the legal rules and principles as determined by a judge, and applied to the facts by a jury. In the law systems of some countries, such as America, a jury may be the trier of fact in both criminal and civil cases. In England, a jury will only decide on the facts in criminal cases. In a civil case, a particular problem is a question of fact or law is significant because it can determine whether a party wins the case on summary judgment
The difference between fact and law is important in three other areas. the dissection between matters for the judge and matters for the jury to decide – law to the judge, a fact to the jury only the law is binding points of law only for appeals. For example, those to the UK Supreme Court) (appeals areas of right on matters of law, and leave has to be sought on appeals on fact Something is fact if: it could be as well determined by a layperson) as a judge it is a question of degree it is a question of typical.
If the question of the meaning of an common word (as in Cozens v. Brutus 1973, for the meaning of the word “insulting” in the Public Order Act 1936, or whether something is of “satisfactory” quality for the purposes of the Sale of Goods Act).Whether a problem is a question of fact or law is not always clear. English case of Carmichael and Another v National Power Plc, the Court of Appeal held that the employment tribunal should have decided as a matter of law that an exchange of letters constitute an offer and acceptance that gave rise to a written service contract. The House of Lords disagreed and said that the parties had not intended the letters to be the sole record of their agreement and that oral exchanges could also be taken into account. This difference in interpretation direct to the Court of Appeal reverses the choice of an employment tribunal and the House of Lords restoring that same decision.
Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any, [email protected]