The aim of this article is to examine how the structure of legislation can nurture accessibility and effectiveness of legislation.
It explores whether the legislative drafter in carrying out the task of drafting can nurture effective communication of the policy maker’s intent to the targeted audience by making use of the structure of legislation as a tool, to ensure the legislation is accessible to the end user, and foster effectiveness.
The third and fourth stage of Thornton’s stages of the drafting process – design and composition – would be examined and also Peter Butt’s types of structure, which relates to the drafting of legal documents but would be applied in this paper, to the drafting of legislation.

Statutory interpretation is quickly becoming the primary function of our courts. Ambiguity, unexpected scenarios, and drafting errors in legislation compound this challenging task, obliging many judges to turn to debate transcripts and other legislative materials in search of our elected representatives’ intent.
Legislatures are intrinsically the products of the societies that create them, however, with each possessing a diverging structure and rules of procedure. These institutional differences affect bills’ drafting, consideration, and passage, and represent the mechanical process of how legislative bargains are translated into binding statutory text.
Through the lenses of the United Kingdom Parliament and the United States Congress, the fundamental logic behind these institutions’ legislative bargains will be explored, assessing the impact of procedure and the interests that shape the enacting process. Parliamentary tradition emphasizes the foundational role of Her Majesty’s Government in managing virtually all legislation, maintaining a unity of purpose without compromise, amendment, or purposefully ambiguous provisions. Conversely, unique procedures and the multiplicity of veto players within Congress necessitates that compromise is a de facto requirement for passage. The diverging logic behind these legislative bargains offers powerful evidence that institutional characteristics have a dispositive impact on the utility of legislative materials in statutory interpretation.

Between 2011 and 2014, the Vatican City State (VCS) experienced a reform process which dramatically changed its financial system. The process is still ongoing, and its goal is to establish an anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) system. Importantly, this system will be based on the AML/CTF EU legislation and international standards. These facts are noteworthy. First, the reforms cast light on the main Vatican financial institutions against the background of the secrecy that has always characterized their functioning and business operations. Accordingly, there is now more transparency and information about the Vatican financial system. Second, the relevant EU law and international standards are tools through which the VCS can, for the first time, join an international network of countries, sharing and applying the same rules against money laundering (ML) and terrorist financing (TF). This is of extraordinary importance for a jurisdiction like the VCS, which has never referred to European or international principles in its rule-making. In particular, the openness to EU law and international standards stimulates investigating the reasons behind these changes and the impact that these sources of law are having on a jurisdiction regarded as ‘unique’ in the world.

The number of adults choosing to cohabit has increased by over 67% since 1991. Despite such a dramatic shift in social norms, the law governing financial relief upon relationship breakdown remains inept to handle the significant increase in cohabitants. This article examines how the current system of family trusts constitutes an archaic and inadequate means of dividing cohabitants’ assets. The law of trusts fails to reflect the subtleties of personal relationships, often resulting in financial injustice. The author goes on to consider the notion of common law marriage, highlighting how despite attempts by both the government and policy makers to dispel the concept it nevertheless remains prevalent throughout the United Kingdom. The core counterargument to extending financial relief is that it would undermine the institution of marriage and obscure the boundaries between cohabitant and spouse. This article critically examines this claim, adopting cross-jurisdictional analysis by considering the experiences of Scotland, Ireland and Australia where cohabitants have greater financial rights before concluding that the argument fails to stand up to scrutiny. The author ends by advancing a series of reforms designed to vindicate cohabitants, resulting in a fairer distribution of assets and bringing legal recognition to the United Kingdom’s largest growing family unit.

Article 15 Brussels II-bis provides for the transfer of jurisdiction from one Member State to another. This contribution examines the conditions and practice surrounding the application of Article 15 Brussels II-bis from two jurisdictions, namely the Netherlands, and England and Wales. From this comparison it is clear that there are evident divergent viewpoints as to the approach to be taken with Article 15 Brussels II-bis. This article is, therefore, aimed at bringing those differences in approach to the forefront so as to assist the European legislature in the ongoing evaluation of the Brussels II-bis Regulation.

The article investigates the intrinsic and instrumental roles of judicial education in broader contours of the rule of law theory and reform practice in a developing country. It focuses on: firstly, the relationship between judicial education and the rule of law theory and reform practice; secondly, whether and how judicial education can promote the rule of law; and third, the challenges to a successful judicial education in strengthening the rule of law. Examining Pakistan as a case study, the article explores challenges to judicial education in Pakistan and critically assesses Pakistan’s rule of law reform efforts to overcome those challenges. Evidence shows that key challenges to judicial education in Pakistan are lack of a national judicial educational vision and a well thought out policy, coordinated efforts to training needs assessment, curriculum and faculty, research and learning best practices, as means of development and innovation. Of special concern is the role of judicial education in promoting the rule of law to address security issues embedded in (bad) governance. The article finds that in view of its initial limited success, the judicial academy of Pakistan’s terrorism-hit Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province may play a role model to improve judicial services and thereby help promote the rule of law in a post-conflict society.

Despite the fact that in recent years a number of states have extended to non-marital children many of the legal rights previously exclusively granted to legitimate children, Botswana still denies non-marital children a wide constellation of their basic rights. One such area where the rights of non-marital children are violated in Botswana is inheritance. In terms of the law of succession of Botswana, extra-marital children have no real legal rights to inherit from and through their father, both at customary law and Common Law. This article discusses and analyses the rule that excludes non-marital children from inheriting from and through their fathers under the two systems of laws. Its central claim is that this rule is antithetical to extra-marital children’s rights to equality, non-discrimination, and dignity. The article argues that the rule is devoid of social currency, has no place in a democratic society, and must be abolished.