Talk:Court leet

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

England Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Wales Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica says that the court leet survived for formal purposes under the Sheriffs Act 1887 s.40. Halsbury's Laws Direct says that s.40(1) was repealed by the Administration of Justice Act 1977 and s.40(2) in 1998. Unfortunately, it does not give the repealed wording. However, s.23 of the 1977 Act abolishes the jurisdiction of the ancient courts to determine legal proceedings while asserting their continued existence. Does anyone have chapter and verse here? Intrigueingly, the Estray Court for the Lordship of Denbigh and the court leet for the Manor of Laxton survived the 1977 Act. Cutler 10:47, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)

The 1998 repeal was in the Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1998 [1]. --Henrygb 5 July 2005 23:43 (UTC)

The reference to the Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1998 is incorrect. That Act did not abolish any of the exemptions of the 'Administration of Justice Act 1977' applying to the limited jurisdictions of the Courts and Places listed in its Schedules. [18 April 2008 Tony S]

I'm no legal expert, but afaik there are still several Court Leets sitting in the UK, many of which do have some limited legal powers. Exactly what these powers are tends to vary from one court to another, but often involves management & inspection of common land. Court Leets still in existance include Danby in North Yorkshire, the Guildable Manor (Southwark, London), and It is also incorrect that the Henley-in-Arden Court Leet has only ceremonial powers; according to their website (http://www.henley-in-arden.org/court-leet/index.html) "It retains its powers of presentment and its authority as a court of record" and "The Court Leet is recognised as a legally constituted court. Its powers are limited to the making of presentment"Missdipsy (talk) 18:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The repeal of section 40 of the Sheriffs Act 1887 in 1998 did not mean that Court Leets were abolished. They still have limited legal standing.101.98.74.13 (talk) 22:04, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's this page all about? What country? What time? I got here within context, but it's conceiveable that others might come here by accident (searching for "leet", for example :-). How about an introductory paragraph? Groogle 08:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Schedule 4 to the Administration of Justice Act 1977 is based on report number 72 of the Law Commission. If you look at paragraph 18 of that report it says in effect that the courts listed in Part II of Schedule 4 "do not fall or do not clearly fall" into the classes set out in Part I of that Schedule, which classes include Courts Leet.

The following courts which are included in Part II of Schedule 4 are listed in this article as being Courts Leet:

• The City of London Court of Husting
• The Norwich Court of Mayoralty

In light of what the Law Commission said, could we have an explanation as to why these two courts are considered to be Courts Leet (since the Law Commission seemed to have thought that they might not be Courts Leet at all)? James500 (talk) 23:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There cannot be neet distinctions as James500 believes in the definitions of ancient jurisdictions. They might or might not be ourts of any kind, yet they have a jurisdiction of sorts and the Law Commission and 1977 Act merely sought to restrict it to their representative roles. In regard to the two he cites the point was that they did enjoy powers which had not been exercised, or rather diplaced by other entitites yet such powers were enjoyed as if they had a superior authority. These two are both parts of local council structures, the London Hustings is part of its assemblies of the Common Halls to elect Sheriffs and Lord Mayor and also part of the authority of the Court of Common Council and Court of Aldermen; it is limited to enrolling Wills and other records, neither of which have been done for many years. The Norwich Court is limited to the swearing of the local borough Freemen, a rare occurence. TonyS 85.210.0.119 (talk) 18:01, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Court leet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110921173516/http://www.dovecoteinnlaxton.co.uk/court_leet.htm to http://www.dovecoteinnlaxton.co.uk/court_leet.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Court leet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070825121114/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org:80/Court_leet to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Court_leet
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081012030530/http://www.warwick-uk.co.uk/town-council/warwick-court-leet.asp to http://www.warwick-uk.co.uk/town-council/warwick-court-leet.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090508143552/http://www.coss.org.uk:80/30.html to http://coss.org.uk/30.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure the text is clear. At one point the court leet is a type of court baron. Elsewhere the court leet covers criminal matters which were outside the scope of the court baron????94.126.214.30 (talk) 14:17, 23 July 2021 (UTC)jde[reply]