Q.Which of the following is NOT considered an essential feature of law?

Three of the four options describe genuine, recognised features of law (enforcement by sovereign authority, regulating conduct, and uniform application) — the fourth describes something law specifically does NOT do.

Law can and does change over time, but only through a legitimate process: legislation (Parliament amending or repealing an Act), judicial precedent, or a formally recognised custom — never automatically at the whim of a single person's belief about right and wrong.

Why (d) is the correct answer (i.e., NOT a feature of law): One of law's defining features is precisely that it is stable and predictable — a rule of law binds everyone equally and continues to apply until it is changed through a proper legal process (an Act of the legislature, a binding judicial decision, or a duly recognised custom). If law changed automatically every time an individual's personal moral opinion shifted, it would offer no certainty at all, and the whole idea of "equality before the law" (everyone bound by the same rule) would collapse, since everyone would effectively be free to redefine the rule for themselves.

Why the other options ARE genuine features of law:

• (a) Enforcement by a sovereign authority through courts is exactly what gives law its binding force — this is central to both Austin's and Salmond's definitions.
• (b) Regulating human conduct and the relationships between people in society is the very purpose of having law at all.
• (c) Uniform application to everyone within its jurisdiction, without arbitrary exception, is what makes law fair and predictable — this feature connects directly to the "equality before the law" principle studied under Rule of Law.

Students sometimes assume law is rigid and can never change at all — that is also incorrect. Law does change, but ONLY through a recognised legal process (legislation, judicial precedent, or recognised custom), never automatically to track one person's shifting personal opinion. The exam is testing this precise nuance, not whether law can change at all.