Questions of law are decided by judges, while questions of fact are decided by juries. Judges use statutes, case law, and legal opinions to assess questions of law. Lawyers can raise questions of law during trials and appeals. Legal technicalities can create openings for appeals. Judges may issue opinions when there is no previous body of law to rely on.
A question of law is an aspect of a case that must be assessed in terms of the law, with the court deciding which aspect of the law applies and how it should be applied. Questions of law are the responsibility of the judge, not the jury, while questions of fact are decided by the jury or the judge if a jury is not present. Making decisions about matters of law is an important part of the court process.
The law includes statutes, case law, and written legal opinions. A judge can use all of these elements of the law to assess a question of law. For example, in a case where someone is being tried for robbery, the judge must consider the areas of the law that pertain to robbery to decide whether or not they apply to the case at hand and whether or not a robbery has occurred. The jury, however, must hear the facts presented in the case to decide whether or not the defendant actually committed the crime for which he is being tried.
Judges rely on their training and experience to make decisions on a question of law when it arises. Lawyers for both sides can raise questions of law during the trial to ask the judge for an assessment and consideration. Attorneys can go to court to ask that a judge consider the legal implications of an aspect of the case, and they can also file appeals asking the judge to quash the other party’s motions or evidence on legal grounds.
When people prepare to appeal a judgment, one of the areas of the case they look closely is the question of law that has been decided in the course of the case. It may not be possible to contest the facts assessed and determined by the jury, but sometimes a legal technicality can create an opening for an appeal. For example, if a judge declared evidence inadmissible when it was actually admissible, this can be used as a reason to request a retrial in which that evidence would be presented.
In some cases a judge does not have a previous body of law on which to rely in order to decide a point of law. In these cases the judge must issue an opinion on the matter which legally justifies the action taken in matters of law.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
