VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[mad_maxine]

the Judiciary can deem law inavlid if it is contrary to the constitution or did not follow proper procedures, so in reality all of the arms overlap in one way or another.

I wouldn't exactly call that an overlap though. Technically the courts place checks and balances on the legislature to ensure that they do not surpass their constitutional powers or legislate ultra vires, out of their jurisdiction. And even then, that's only when the legislation is challenged in the high court if memory serves me correctly. It is still referred to in all texts as being separate and independent of the executive and legislative arms.

[HawthornM8]

I thought mentioning that judiciary is completely independent was just a given when I said two of them overlap. You guys have knowledge that surpasses the VCE course but there in the VCE sense, there is only the overlap between the two and judiciary is completely separate.

[mad_maxine]

I thought mentioning that judiciary is completely independent was just a given when I said two of them overlap. You guys have knowledge that surpasses the VCE course but there in the VCE sense, there is only the overlap between the two and judiciary is completely separate.

It's still within the course, but it's something you'll know once you finish the whole course, where you have to put both units three and four together. When you do the constitution it'll make a lot more sense, trust me!!
It's not a given unless you write it. If you don't write it, examiners won't just assume you know that, or that's what you meant to say. It's only a few more words and guaranteed to get you the full marks. Be succinct, but thorough and cover all bases 

[HawthornM8]

It's still within the course, but it's something you'll know once you finish the whole course, where you have to put both units three and four together. When you do the constitution it'll make a lot more sense, trust me!!
It's not a given unless you write it. If you don't write it, examiners won't just assume you know that, or that's what you meant to say. It's only a few more words and guaranteed to get you the full marks. Be succinct, but thorough and cover all bases 

Haha, yeah I know - I meant when I was writing it in here I thought it was a given, I write soooo verbosely on my SACS to ensure full marks. When I say that though, I wrote (first SAC a few weeks ago) as much as I can on any given topic on my SAC and came up short on almost every answer by a few lines and was so worried that I went over all of them, summarising what I already wrote to put some more length to it and it all ended up convoluted. After I did that SAC I was like WTF how do you get marks and how are you supposed to write answers? A few other people were in the same situation for that first SAC, although they were all confident they did really well (100%) whilst I was almost sure I'd be scraping 70% if I were lucky with the length I wrote. I ended up with 90% and the cohort average (and this is a top 50 school) was something like 60%.

Would you be able to offer any advice mate? Also, how did you learn? It seems like in Legal you can't exactly make notes with definitions, but instead a whole lot of crap you have to dot-point under each heading and somehow remember. At this current point in time, I'm procrastinating for my Psychology SAC study and am downloading YouTube videos into .mp3 to put onto my phone and listen to whenever. Wouldn't be all that great for definitions I wouldn't think but it would give me a solid grounding for those aforementioned 'dot points.' I really want a high score in Legal because you can as long as you put in the effort but I'm finding answering questions difficult, especially when you lose marks (like I did) for not putting in phrases or expressions in your reasoning or definitions - I can't remember what I didn't write because I thought it was a bit silly (whilst happy with my result), but although I wrote this one it was something like not writing 'chain of accountability' in your explanation whilst talking about responsible government.

This is like my answers - convoluted (although not this long!) XD

[Bluegirl]

Which method used to influence legislative change  by groups and individuals is the most effective?

It's a question and says to justify my response, but don't they all have pros and cons? Which is the most effective?

[mad_maxine]

Haha, yeah I know - I meant when I was writing it in here I thought it was a given, I write soooo verbosely on my SACS to ensure full marks. When I say that though, I wrote (first SAC a few weeks ago) as much as I can on any given topic on my SAC and came up short on almost every answer by a few lines and was so worried that I went over all of them, summarising what I already wrote to put some more length to it and it all ended up convoluted. After I did that SAC I was like WTF how do you get marks and how are you supposed to write answers? A few other people were in the same situation for that first SAC, although they were all confident they did really well (100%) whilst I was almost sure I'd be scraping 70% if I were lucky with the length I wrote. I ended up with 90% and the cohort average (and this is a top 50 school) was something like 60%.

Would you be able to offer any advice mate? Also, how did you learn? It seems like in Legal you can't exactly make notes with definitions, but instead a whole lot of crap you have to dot-point under each heading and somehow remember. At this current point in time, I'm procrastinating for my Psychology SAC study and am downloading YouTube videos into .mp3 to put onto my phone and listen to whenever. Wouldn't be all that great for definitions I wouldn't think but it would give me a solid grounding for those aforementioned 'dot points.' I really want a high score in Legal because you can as long as you put in the effort but I'm finding answering questions difficult, especially when you lose marks (like I did) for not putting in phrases or expressions in your reasoning or definitions - I can't remember what I didn't write because I thought it was a bit silly (whilst happy with my result), but although I wrote this one it was something like not writing 'chain of accountability' in your explanation whilst talking about responsible government.

This is like my answers - convoluted (although not this long!) XD

I'll try to help as much as I can, not that great at explaining tho!!
- went into my 1st sac feeling unprepared, like I was gonna fail. I waffled, I made junk up, I thought I left things out. so imagine my surprise when i got 100%!! lesson: go with your instincts.

- take it one sac at a time. i felt like i was going to flunk each sac right before i did it. and ended up full marking each and every sac. lesson: if you start strong, you'll finish strong.

- ppl i knew that were overconfident, one person in particular, did badly in those sacs and in the exam. its good to be confident in your abilities, but not so much that it gives you a false sense of security. its the last thing you want, really. you have a great attitude, just maintain it throughout the year! 

- with notes, just organise them under the study design dot points. your notes will not be small little dot points. they will be slabs of paragraphs and essays, unless you summarise that info. incorporate your definitions into them, so writing them become second nature. perfect your definitions.

- i didnt have q cards, podcasts, or videos. i was a very inactive learner. i just rote learned all content and did questions. with your methods of learning, thats a whole heap more than i did, youve got that bit pretty much covered i reckon. do what works for you.

- dw bout it, writing legal answers is something you will get used to. it doesnt ever come naturally, but with a ton of practice, you can perfect the art

- again, definitions are everything. you may need to define something, and then explain it or use examples or analyse or evaluate it.

i wrote some other stuff but my laptop died and i had to completely re-write this whole post  Frustration.

and 90% is a great mark for legal!! and dw, my legal answers were convoluted, and a LOT longer than your post 

[M_BONG]

I thought mentioning that judiciary is completely independent was just a given when I said two of them overlap. You guys have knowledge that surpasses the VCE course but there in the VCE sense, there is only the overlap between the two and judiciary is completely separate.

I think the confusion you are having is this:  The Judiciary is kept as independent as possible but as far as the separation of powers, it is not completely isolated (there is overlap).
 The judiciary is apolitical, will not be influenced by the other two branch in its decisions but it still acts as a "check" on the executive and the legislative so the judiciary is not entirely separate.

Also, the judiciary can, in practice, influence parliament's law-making (something you learn later in Unit 3). They can pass a judgment and parliament can be persuaded to change the law for a variety of reasons or they can interpret an act broadly or narrowly (literally or purposively) and force parliament to change the wording of an Act.

A true separation of powers would mean something along the lines of each branch not able to influence the operation of another. But as you know, the courts can declare legislation invalid; the Attorney-General appoints/approves, under advice from CJ, all judges. So the courts do have some overlap with the executive/legislative.

You're right though, you don't need to get too confused about the separation of powers  in the VCE sense..

Which method used to influence legislative change  by groups and individuals is the most effective?

It's a question and says to justify my response, but don't they all have pros and cons? Which is the most effective?

Yes you're right, all methods have pros and cons. This is why you will have to argue why in your opinion one method is the most effective. The question asks for your opinion. Therefore, there is no one right answer. Any argument on the most effective method which involves justification will be correct.

Haha, yeah I know - I meant when I was writing it in here I thought it was a given, I write soooo verbosely on my SACS to ensure full marks. When I say that though, I wrote (first SAC a few weeks ago) as much as I can on any given topic on my SAC and came up short on almost every answer by a few lines and was so worried that I went over all of them, summarising what I already wrote to put some more length to it and it all ended up convoluted. After I did that SAC I was like WTF how do you get marks and how are you supposed to write answers? A few other people were in the same situation for that first SAC, although they were all confident they did really well (100%) whilst I was almost sure I'd be scraping 70% if I were lucky with the length I wrote. I ended up with 90% and the cohort average (and this is a top 50 school) was something like 60%.

Would you be able to offer any advice mate? Also, how did you learn? It seems like in Legal you can't exactly make notes with definitions, but instead a whole lot of crap you have to dot-point under each heading and somehow remember. At this current point in time, I'm procrastinating for my Psychology SAC study and am downloading YouTube videos into .mp3 to put onto my phone and listen to whenever. Wouldn't be all that great for definitions I wouldn't think but it would give me a solid grounding for those aforementioned 'dot points.' I really want a high score in Legal because you can as long as you put in the effort but I'm finding answering questions difficult, especially when you lose marks (like I did) for not putting in phrases or expressions in your reasoning or definitions - I can't remember what I didn't write because I thought it was a bit silly (whilst happy with my result), but although I wrote this one it was something like not writing 'chain of accountability' in your explanation whilst talking about responsible government.

This is like my answers - convoluted (although not this long!) XD

Yeah the annoying thing about Legal is the task-words and the little things like actually responding to the stimulus material. It all comes with practice.

This is why a lot of people say you can work hard to get a 40 in Legal and anything higher than that is mostly just chance.

But it's early days.. you should learn the course (don't fall behind w/ your class). Most classes finish the course by October so you will have plenty of time to practice.

But for SACs: try not to go off tangent. Only write what you think will get you the marks. And listen to what your  teacher tells you (some teachers have preferences in writing styles).

[Politics]

I'm having some problems with the follow questions, and would like a few pointers to get me on the right track if possible!
- Critically analyse three factors that may hinder the ability of parliament to change the law?
- What factors limit the capacity of parliaments to change the law?

I feel like they are really similar questions, anyways, any help would be appreciated!

[007]

Can someone please help me out here with marking my answer to this question. I've written everything that my school has provided in the notes to-do with the role of the VLRC but I'm coming up so short against the suggested lines, and the answer is similar just more content.

Describe the role and function of the VLRC in assessing the need for change in the law, such as this one. (4 marks).

The role of the Victorian Law Reform Commission is to research and make recommendations on the law on matters referred to it by State (Vic.) Parliament. The VLRC will engage in community-wide consultation and debate on the issue, and will consult with experts in the field of review. The recommendations will be presented in a final report to the attorney-general which will be tabled in state parliament. As to whether the recommendations of the VLRC are accepted is entirely up to parliament.

[Politics]

Can someone please help me out here with marking my answer to this question. I've written everything that my school has provided in the notes to-do with the role of the VLRC but I'm coming up so short against the suggested lines, and the answer is similar just more content.

Describe the role and function of the VLRC in assessing the need for change in the law, such as this one. (4 marks).

The role of the Victorian Law Reform Commission is to research and make recommendations on the law on matters referred to it by State (Vic.) Parliament. The VLRC will engage in community-wide consultation and debate on the issue, and will consult with experts in the field of review. The recommendations will be presented in a final report to the attorney-general which will be tabled in state parliament. As to whether the recommendations of the VLRC are accepted is entirely up to parliament.

As well as this, you could also add something along the lines of "Aswell as direct recommendations from the Attorney General, the Commission can examine, report and make recommendations to the Attorney General on any matter that the Commission considers raises relatively minor legal issues that are of general community concern if the Commission is satisfied that the examination of that matter will not require a significant deployment of the resources available to the Commission”
This is found in Section(1)(B) of the VLRC Act 2000, in plain 'simpler' terms, the Commission staff can undertake there own 'minor' research into areas without a referral.

[007]

As well as this, you could also add something along the lines of "Aswell as direct recommendations from the Attorney General, the Commission can examine, report and make recommendations to the Attorney General on any matter that the Commission considers raises relatively minor legal issues that are of general community concern if the Commission is satisfied that the examination of that matter will not require a significant deployment of the resources available to the Commission”
This is found in Section(1)(B) of the VLRC Act 2000, in plain 'simpler' terms, the Commission staff can undertake there own 'minor' research into areas without a referral.

Cheers mate. I saw this off a video but wasn't sure if it were necessary. All these were in my personal notes but they weren't in the sample answer, nor class notes.

1.11.2   Make Law Reform Recommendations on Matters referred to it by the Attorney-General
o   Conducting Research
o   Consulting with the community
o   Reporting on law reform projects
1.11.3   Make Recommendations on Minor Legal Issues of General Community Concern
o   i.e. Matters not referred by the Attorney General
1.11.4   Suggest to the Attorney-General that they refer a Law Reform Issue to the Commission
o   Generally after consultation with various groups
1.11.5   Educate the Community on Areas of Law Relevant to the Commission’s Work
o   Work with groups to ensure the change is successful
o   Provides information to the public on what the law is
1.11.6   Monitor and Coordinate Law Reform Activity in Victoria
o   Works with other law reform bodies to ensure effective law reform in Victoria
o   e.g. Sentencing Advisory Council

[Politics]

Cheers mate. I saw this off a video but wasn't sure if it were necessary. All these were in my personal notes but they weren't in the sample answer, nor class notes.

1.11.2   Make Law Reform Recommendations on Matters referred to it by the Attorney-General
o   Conducting Research
o   Consulting with the community
o   Reporting on law reform projects
1.11.3   Make Recommendations on Minor Legal Issues of General Community Concern
o   i.e. Matters not referred by the Attorney General
1.11.4   Suggest to the Attorney-General that they refer a Law Reform Issue to the Commission
o   Generally after consultation with various groups
1.11.5   Educate the Community on Areas of Law Relevant to the Commission’s Work
o   Work with groups to ensure the change is successful
o   Provides information to the public on what the law is
1.11.6   Monitor and Coordinate Law Reform Activity in Victoria
o   Works with other law reform bodies to ensure effective law reform in Victoria
o   e.g. Sentencing Advisory Council

Yeah, well what my teacher said to make sure to note in a 'role of the VLRC' type question, is what you basically just said, however mention where it inherits is functions from (act wise), so something like this -
The VLRC is an independent, government funded origination and its functions are defined in the VLRC Act 2000, as the following:
(A) – To examine, report and making recommendations on law reform in Victoria, as referred to the Commission by the Attorney-General.
(B) – To examine, report and make recommendations to the Attorney-General on minor legal issues that are of general community concern
(C) – To suggest to the Attorney-General that a matter relating to law reform in Victoria be referred to the Commission.
(D) – To monitor and co-ordinate law reform activity in Victoria.
(E) – To undertake educational programs on our references.


But i like the additions of your answer as well, but the main thing according to my teacher is stating where gets the roles from the VLRC Act 2000.

[007]

But i like the additions of your answer as well, but the main thing according to my teacher is stating where gets the roles from the VLRC Act 2000.

That makes a lot of sense. Although I doubt I'd be able to remember all those dot points, it would be great to supplement the answer with where it inherits its functions from, which would make it a solid answer.

[Bluegirl]

I'm enjoying legal, I'm just having trouble remembering everything.
Does anyone have any tips??

[Politics]

What is a disadvantage of Responsible Government?
I'm finding it hard to identify a strong disadvantage for responsible government, any help would be appreciated!