Unilever case study

FINAL ASSIGNMENT As discussed the assessment regime has ben changed. Your first assignment will now be worth 50% of the marks available. This assignment is also worth 50% of available marks in this subject. The assignment will be marked out of 100. The marks for both assignments will be added together and divided by 2 Work must be submitted both ‘on line’ through “Turnitin” and in written form on A4 paper, font no less than 12 point with a minimum margin of 3 cm Submissions must be clear and legible. You must provide your full name and student number. Maximum word limit is 3000 words. The word limit does not include footnotes or bibliography which will be considered in assessment. Requests for extension of time must be made prior to the published date for submission Extensions will not normally be granted except in cases of illness, accident or external factors beyond your control. Written evidence of reason must be provided with application for extension. ============================================================= Question 1 ‘How can law be understood in isolation from politics and social values when so much of it is a matter of judicial interpretation (of legislation, constitutional provisions, or the earlier judge made law and of interpreting what judges say?) Surely law in this sense is a moral or political practice of some kind, not just a set of distinctive concepts to analyse?’ Cotterell The Politics of Jurisprudence, A Critical Introduction to Legal Philosophy 2nd ed. 2003. at Chapter 6, p. 145 Differing jurisprudential schools of thought and differing thinkers have critiqued analytic legal positivist theories either in whole or in part. These criticisms come from: Natural law theorists including Fuller, Finniss and Dworkin ( Chs. 5 and 6) Legal Realists or Legal Sceptics like Oliver Wendell Holmes or Karl Llewellyn ( Ch. 7) Feminist thinkers including Carol Gilligan, Catherine MacKinnon and Mary Joe Frug (Ch 8) Critical Race Theorists including Patricia Williams or Mari Matsuda (Ch 8) Choose one of these schools of thought, or one of the leading thinkers, and provide a critical and evaluative explanation of their theoretical positions.