I think instead of the words 'do not like', they 'do not agree' would be better suited. (also some mention of obiter dictum)
so, a more detailed definition:
"Disapproving occurs when a lower court or a court at the same level follows a precedent (either they're bound by it, or following it for the sake of consistency) but the judge makes clear in obiter dictum that although they're compelled to follow the precedent they do not agree with it. If a court on the same level engages in disapproval, a new precedent is established and a higher court will determine which of the two precedent stands."
I think that's an awesome explanation!
When answering a question in the legal exam, is it good to link our question to the elements of an effective legal system where necessary?
Or do we need to be specifically asked about them to include them in our answers?
You only need to do what's asked for in the question. So I'd be looking for references to 'effectiveness'.
1. While although VCAT is cost effective and built its premise on not having much lawyer activity, recently there has been increased amount of lawyers being used and hence the cost associated with using VCAT have increased
2. Mediation and Conciliation are not binding and may result in lost time
3. The cases may still end up going to court.
Careful with your second and third points. Med and con *are* binding if conducted through VCAT, because the agreements will be made into the binding order; if not, the dispute will go to a hearing as scheduled unless the complainant withdraws their complaint. Also, if it's in VCAT jurisdiction it generally won't be a matter heard in court, so cases don't hop from one to the other.
But the the first point is good, along with the recent fee hikes. Also, hearings can still be quite adversarial, and some lists are operating on decent waiting lists and delays.
Not sure if I understood the question correctly but,
VCAT was established in 1998 as a body to resolve civil disputes in a more cost-effective, informal and timely manner. VCAT fees begin at $37 whereas the court fees can be quite extensive depending on the duration of the case and the complexity. Strict rules of evidence and procedure are solid within the courts; however, due to the absence of these rules of evidence and procedure VCAT is more informal. Hearings are conducted across the state, at various locations, this is unlike the courts. Having more locations for VCAT hearings increases VCAT's accessibility as they are physically closer to the public. The court process can become very time-consuming, depending on the complexity of the case, some civil cases can go on for years; however, with VCAT most cases are heard within 2 weeks and solved within 1 day. Both the courts and VCAT are bodies that individuals can use to resolve civil disputes, VCAT is more cost-effective, informal and quick.
These specific details are from a summary textbook, did you want more detail because I don't think we'd ever need to go in more detail, do we?
[EDIT] Just understood it was the negatives, whoops!
Haha, the lowest fee is up to $61.50 now, though
Thanks meganrobyn!! I'm so glad you pointed out the narrowness of the definitions because tbh I didn't know that I'd been understanding RODD wrong!! (I'm sooooo glad that I picked up that mistake before the exam...).
Would these definitions work better?
I like those! But EdwinJS has an even better 'disapproving' explanation after your post, imo
Mod edit: Merged posts. (melting meithy)