SAC Question

[EmmaCayte]

Hey everyone!

I've been having a dispute with my teacher about the marks I received for a question in our Civil Justice System SAC. Personally, I feel that my teacher marked me unfairly, and so I think it would be helpful to get some feedback from others.

Could someone mark my response to this question? Feedback would be appreciated 


Explain the use of arbitration and mediation within the Magistrates Courts (3 marks)

Arbitration is a more formal alternative dispute resolution method where the disputing parties meet before an independent third party (the arbitrator), who facilitates the dispute to help the parties come to a mutual resolution. The arbitrator can offer legal advice and has the power to make a legally binding decision for the parties. Arbitration is used in the Magistrates court for disputes under $10,000, as it allows the parties the opportunity to resolve the dispute in a less costly and timely manner. The presiding judicial officer often acts as the arbitrator in these cases.

On the other hand, Mediation is a less formal alternative dispute resolution method where the disputing parties meet before an independent third party (the mediator), who facilitates the dispute to help the parties come to a mutual resolution. The mediator cannot offer legal advice and does not have the power to make a legally binding decision for the parties. Mediation is used as a mandatory pre-trial procedure (such as in the Directions Hearing) to allow the parties the opportunity to resolve the dispute out of court, and can also be ordered at any time by the presiding judicial officer (as per their judicial powers of case management), to give the parties the opportunity to reach a mutual agreement.

Thanks!

[mia2003]

Hi Emma,
You had lots of great details in your answer (and I am also a student so I definitely am not perfect) but I would have left out in reference to arbitration that they come to a "mutual resolution." I think this is a key difference between the two as in arbitration a party 'wins' and another 'loses', or in other words the judicial officer finds in favour of one party so someone will always be dissatisfied. I'm not sure but maybe your teacher was hoping you would explore "the power to order mediation" in terms of one of the powers of judges in civil disputes.
I hope this helps
Mia

[Dwjs]

ordered at any time by the presiding judicial officer

I'd also maybe link the answer to the question more, so, instead of judicial officer, you could say Magistrate as the question specifically asked in regard to the Magistrates' Court.

[EmmaCayte]

Hi Emma,
You had lots of great details in your answer (and I am also a student so I definitely am not perfect) but I would have left out in reference to arbitration that they come to a "mutual resolution." I think this is a key difference between the two as in arbitration a party 'wins' and another 'loses', or in other words the judicial officer finds in favour of one party so someone will always be dissatisfied. I'm not sure but maybe your teacher was hoping you would explore "the power to order mediation" in terms of one of the powers of judges in civil disputes.
I hope this helps
Mia

Hi Mia!
Thanks for the response- that's a great point about the mutual resolution, definitely a key difference I now will not forget

[EmmaCayte]

I'd also maybe link the answer to the question more, so, instead of judicial officer, you could say Magistrate as the question specifically asked in regard to the Magistrates' Court.

Thanks for your feedback!
Yeah, I've since checked with my teacher, and she deducted half a mark because I didn't specifically refer to the Magistrate's court in the second part of my answer, where I talk about mediation. I felt this was a little particular, since I still made reference to it in the first part, and I did think it was clear that I was talking about it.
But, since it's my response, I'm of course going to be a bit biased, so I was wondering if you agree with her judgment?