VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[Lachjames]

Hey folks,

I've got a friend doing Legal 3&4 who desperately needs some help with the following questions (she's quite bright but she doesn't know where to start I think so some guidance or advice would be helpful):

1: Suggest one way in which costs may affect the effectiveness of civil processes and procedures to resolve civil disputes. Explain two ways in which this problem 
may be overcome.
2: To what extent do the processes and procedures for hearing a civil claim contribute to the effective operation of the legal system?

Thanks for any assistance

[meganrobyn]

Thanks! Legal studies is pretty much a handwriting exercise for me after all

Yeah, Legal revision is one of the best ways around to get your hourly wordspeed up!!

[drmockingbird]

Yeah, Legal revision is one of the best ways around to get your hourly wordspeed up!!

hahha, last year when I wasn't able to finish sacs I'd speedcopy the textbook, got all the stuff memorised as well

btw guys go to CPAP when megan presents there, she's epic.

[meganrobyn]

hahha, last year when I wasn't able to finish sacs I'd speedcopy the textbook, got all the stuff memorised as well

btw guys go to CPAP when megan presents there, she's epic.

Ahhh, THANK YOU!!!!!

[90ATAR]

For strengths and weaknesses of dispute resolution methods, my strength is usually quite long and my opposing weakness if often quite short, such as 'however, if the parties do not have equal bargaining power then one party may exert influence over the other party, or one party makes compromises too often which may lead to an unfair result.' Do you think if I am asked to evaluate a strength or something, that I could just use something short such as what I wrote above or kind of string on a bit more being verbose to cover up a few extra lines.

Also in my notes, it explains what mediation, conciliation and arbitration is but doesn't really provide much open for me to compare and contrast the ADR methods or even evaluate.

e.g. Would mediation be a better method for settling a dispute than conciliation? Justify your answer.' (4 marks). I'd probably write something along the lines of this.

Mediation would be a better method for settling a dispute when compared to conciliation. The mediator does not openly suggest ideas for resolution, but instead allows the opportunities for the parties to maintain control over the dispute, explore ideas that could assist in dispute resolution, as well as resolve the dispute so both parties are satisfied. This essentially enables the parties to work out the dispute for themselves with the mediator listening to the discussion and ensuring both parties are not going unheard. On the other hand, conciliation involves a conciliator openly suggesting ideas that will assist in dispute resolution but does not make a fully enforced decision on the behalf to the parties. The conciliator may plant ideas for resolution in the minds of the parties which may result in one or both of the parties not being fully satisfied; the original 'want' of one of the parties from the resolution may have changed completely, which can lead to an unhappy resolution that the parties do not follow. Overall, mediation is a more effective means of dispute resolution as the parties negotiate and bargain for themselves in the dispute for a resolution with a third party facilitating the negotiation.

Would this be four marks? I really don't know how I would get marks for something like this, so I'd just write as much as I could and cross my fingers. BTW, if I was asked to compare anything other than mediation, I would probably only be able to string 2-3 sentences. 

[clidedescope]

Hey guys, there was a question on my legal sac that was something like this:
"A man takes a civil matter to the Magistrates Court and is compensated $20,000. He does not believe this to be an adequate amount and wants to appeal to receive a higher sum of money. Which court would he appeal to and why?"
Now, I said County Court if there was an act of parliament that allowed it, but I'm beginning to doubt myself. I know that civil appeals can go to the Supreme Court on a point of law, but I'm not sure if the amount compensated would come under that definition. Is anybody able to shed some light on this so I don't keep on stressing before I get my result back? Thanks

[chasej]

Hey guys, there was a question on my legal sac that was something like this:
"A man takes a civil matter to the Magistrates Court and is compensated $20,000. He does not believe this to be an adequate amount and wants to appeal to receive a higher sum of money. Which court would he appeal to and why?"
Now, I said County Court if there was an act of parliament that allowed it, but I'm beginning to doubt myself. I know that civil appeals can go to the Supreme Court on a point of law, but I'm not sure if the amount compensated would come under that definition. Is anybody able to shed some light on this so I don't keep on stressing before I get my result back? Thanks

There are no appeals on the amount of damages in civil cases. Only point of law appeals, which are appealed on the basis the magistrate incorrectly applied a legal principle (a point of law) to the facts of the case when making their decision. An example of a point of law appeal may be a magistrate incorrectly interpreting words in an act, so the aggrieved party appeals the interpretation by the magistrate. Appeals based on thinking you aren't given enough money are not allowed, that isn't to say however an appeal on a point of law couldn't result in more damages being awarded, for example if there was a law saying a full debt must be paid, yet the magi's only ordered 50% of the debt be paid, the aggrieved party could appeal to have the full debt paid, as the fault in the judgement (and hence appeal) was based on an incorrect interpretation of the law, not the damages itself.

Hope that wasn't to confusing.


Bit of a trick question as the question implies there is a court the case would go to, when in reality there isn't.

[meganrobyn]

There are no appeals on the amount of damages in civil cases. Only point of law appeals, which are appealed on the basis the magistrate incorrectly applied a legal principle (a point of law) to the facts of the case when making their decision. An example of a point of law appeal may be a magistrate incorrectly interpreting words in an act, so the aggrieved party appeals the interpretation by the magistrate. Appeals based on thinking you aren't given enough money are not allowed, that isn't to say however an appeal on a point of law couldn't result in more damages being awarded, for example if there was a law saying a full debt must be paid, yet the magi's only ordered 50% of the debt be paid, the aggrieved party could appeal to have the full debt paid, as the fault in the judgement (and hence appeal) was based on an incorrect interpretation of the law, not the damages itself.

Hope that wasn't to confusing.


Bit of a trick question as the question implies there is a court the case would go to, when in reality there isn't.

Great answer - I'm on board with that. But, I have to say, pretty creative in saying that he could go to the CC if an act allowed - I think I'd credit that if I marked it in a SAC!

[connie990]

Hey i've never posted anything on here before so I hope i'm doing this right. Can someone please help me with this question, it's worth 8 marks.

'Compare the purpose of two pre-trial procedures for the resolution of criminal csses and civil disputes.'

[meganrobyn]

Hey i've never posted anything on here before so I hope i'm doing this right. Can someone please help me with this question, it's worth 8 marks.

'Compare the purpose of two pre-trial procedures for the resolution of criminal csses and civil disputes.'

That's a terrible question!! Do they mean one criminal and one civil? Or can you choose two of one and none of the other? And how one earth can you get 1 1/2 to 2 pages of writing out of comparing some simple little purposes???!!!!

You don't need help: that question needs help.

[connie990]

That's a terrible question!! Do they mean one criminal and one civil? Or can you choose two of one and none of the other? And how one earth can you get 1 1/2 to 2 pages of writing out of comparing some simple little purposes???!!!!

You don't need help: that question needs help.

No idea to be honest. I think it's asking for both criminal and civil because it says 'and'. I still have no idea how to answer this question :/

[meganrobyn]

Look, I was being facetious - but totally serious at the same time. I really have any idea what they're expecting, and I think the question should be fixed up.

But. If I were answering it and had no other choice, I would do it like this:

Pick one criminal procedure and one civil one.
Describe the purposes of each of them (you don't need to do this in a compare question, but we're trying to spread it out to 8 marks here).
Explain similarities between the purposes.
Explain differences.

And just try to write a lot of detail.

[connie990]

Look, I was being facetious - but totally serious at the same time. I really have any idea what they're expecting, and I think the question should be fixed up.

But. If I were answering it and had no other choice, I would do it like this:

Pick one criminal procedure and one civil one.
Describe the purposes of each of them (you don't need to do this in a compare question, but we're trying to spread it out to 8 marks here).
Explain similarities between the purposes.
Explain differences.

And just try to write a lot of detail.

Thanks for your help 

[bella652214]

Quick question - how would you answer this two part question? Thanks everyone!

1. a) Describe two problems (e.g. high costs & delays) that an individual may face when taking a civil dispute to court. (4m)
    b) For each problem suggested in part (c) of this question, explain two changes that has or could help to overcome the problem and enhance the effective operation of the legal system. (4m)

[zeiinaaa]

Quick question - how would you answer this two part question? Thanks everyone!

1. a) Describe two problems (e.g. high costs & delays) that an individual may face when taking a civil dispute to court. (4m)
    b) For each problem suggested in part (c) of this question, explain two changes that has or could help to overcome the problem and enhance the effective operation of the legal system. (4m)

A)
The court system, whilst effective consists of many issues which might be stressful and time consuming for individuals.

The very first issue is the high costs. Settling a dispute in the court is very costly, and the court fees have a tendency to be very high, along with the need for legal representation. In addition, some parties might want to Appeal to a higher court which generally adds even more to the high costs.

A second issue is delays, due to the fact that  the judge or a party may be ill which means that the court date has to be rescheduled. More delays are associated with the fact the processes and procedures involved in the legal system are very complex and usually there are a lack of resources to commence a proceeding.

B)
Many changes have been implemented in our legal system to reduce delays and high costs.
This includes the more efficient use of technology. In 2009-2010 the Victorian Supreme Court introduced the integrated court management system, known as 'court view', which aims to reduce DELAYS by providing electronic filing for legal council and recording system for court data.

Another change which has occurred is the increased use of ADR (mainly mediation) within the court system, which will allow for an increase use of judge-led mediation, court ADR coordinators and case conferences to resolve disputes prior to trial in the county and supreme courts.