VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[maddihanna]

Hey guys, i was just wondering (sorta late to ask ) but do we always include cases into every question? i know they aren't really necessary in questions with less allocated marks, but i'm kinda confused about the whole idea about cases?

I've been using the standard cases (Mabo case, trigwell case, Kevin and jennifer etc.) , but i just don't see how i can insert them into a 4-6 markers? Are they really only reserved for the 8-10 markers? thanks guys

Cases when applied correctly, show a really good understanding of knowledge. They are definitely not necessary in every question and are only really necessary when the question asks for it. However, like you mentioned, they are really good for supporting arguments in the larger 8-10 mark questions. I highly recommend using examples for 'evaluate' questions, so you can ensure you are arguing with some sort of legitimacy.
In smaller questions, they can be used to clarify the information you are supplying or support an argument you are making. (E.g. if you are talking about ways you can avoid precedent, you could use an example to show when avoiding precedent occurred) But again, is not necessary unless the question specifically asks for an example.

Does this help?

[iClinton]

Hey Guys,
Chapter 9 (Civil Procedure)
Do we need to evaluate the pre-trial procedures?
Can't find it in the study design
Thanks

[clarke54321]

What are the disadvantages of mediation not having to comply to the rules of evidence and procedure?

[cameotodd]

What are the disadvantages of mediation not having to comply to the rules of evidence and procedure?

You could argue that the absence of strict rules of evidence and procedure may not cater to each types of parties as some parties believe that formality is necessary during a dispute resolution session. Also, the absence of rules of procedure could help create a sense imbalance during the mediation session in terms of the parties as one party may become overly dominant and the other party may have to sacrifice too much and thus resulting in an unjust outcome.

[clarke54321]

You could argue that the absence of strict rules of evidence and procedure may not cater to each types of parties as some parties believe that formality is necessary during a dispute resolution session. Also, the absence of rules of procedure could help create a sense imbalance during the mediation session in terms of the parties as one party may become overly dominant and the other party may have to sacrifice too much and thus resulting in an unjust outcome.

Thank you for this helpful response 

[meganrobyn]

What are the disadvantages of mediation not having to comply to the rules of evidence and procedure?

Mediation actually has very strict rules of procedure - just not *trial* procedure. But the mediator goes through the rules for the mediation at the start, and they are designed to ensure that each party has equal chance for contribution and that neither can totally dominate the other - things like uninterrupted statements, and alone-time with the mediator to write a list of what they're willing to offer, are standard. Eg: http://www.aat.gov.au/steps-in-a-review/alternative-dispute-resolution/mediation-process-model

But you can critique it for not having any rules of *trial* procedure (eg examination of witnesses) that you particularly like.

[meganrobyn]

Hey Guys,
Chapter 9 (Civil Procedure)
Do we need to evaluate the pre-trial procedures?
Can't find it in the study design
Thanks

Even when strengths and weaknesses aren't listed in the Key Content, the ability to discuss/evaluate/form opinions is always a Key Skill.................for everything. Take U3 O2, for instance: there aren't any strengths and weaknesses listed in the whole Constitution outcome content!

[iClinton]

Even when strengths and weaknesses aren't listed in the Key Content, the ability to discuss/evaluate/form opinions is always a Key Skill.................for everything. Take U3 O2, for instance: there aren't any strengths and weaknesses listed in the whole Constitution outcome content!

Okay, thanks

[thaaanyan]

Even when strengths and weaknesses aren't listed in the Key Content, the ability to discuss/evaluate/form opinions is always a Key Skill.................for everything. Take U3 O2, for instance: there aren't any strengths and weaknesses listed in the whole Constitution outcome content!

Wait, so from this I would probably have to know how to evaluate criminal pre-trial procedures right???
How would you structure a question like this: would you dedicate a separate paragraph to evaluating bail, remand and committal proceedings? or would you take 1 "characteristic" like 'fair and unbiased trial' and then evaluate how well each of the procedures fulfill this proceeding?

[meganrobyn]

Wait, so from this I would probably have to know how to evaluate criminal pre-trial procedures right???
How would you structure a question like this: would you dedicate a separate paragraph to evaluating bail, remand and committal proceedings? or would you take 1 "characteristic" like 'fair and unbiased trial' and then evaluate how well each of the procedures fulfill this proceeding?

Yep. And depends on the wording of the question - plus individual preference.

[thaaanyan]

Yep. And depends on the wording of the question - plus individual preference.

Thank-you! My teacher told me that if the question is "evaluate the effectiveness of criminal pre-trial procedures" you evaluate using FAT, but in a question that's like "evaluate criminal pre-trial procedures" you would evaluate them individually one-by-one? Is that right?

[meganrobyn]

Thank-you! My teacher told me that if the question is "evaluate the effectiveness of criminal pre-trial procedures" you evaluate using FAT, but in a question that's like "evaluate criminal pre-trial procedures" you would evaluate them individually one-by-one? Is that right?

Not reallllllllly. They're virtually identical.

In the first one you would have to throw in references to 'fair', 'time' and something to do with access (maybe cost, maybe physical location, etc) - but you wouldn't need to rely heavily on the features and you certainly wouldn't need to structure your answer around them... although you absolutely could if you wanted to.

In the second one you could answer it in exactly the same way - the only difference is that the examiner won't be explicitly looking for those references to 'fair' etc sprinkled through (although it would be REALLY hard to evaluate procedures without *any* mention of time, cost, complexity, etc, so it's seriously not anything to worry about!).

Generally it's the *task* word that tells you how to structure your answer: not the content words. And, even then, there's a lot of individual preference involved.

[thaaanyan]

Not reallllllllly. They're virtually identical.

In the first one you would have to throw in references to 'fair', 'time' and something to do with access (maybe cost, maybe physical location, etc) - but you wouldn't need to rely heavily on the features and you certainly wouldn't need to structure your answer around them... although you absolutely could if you wanted to.

In the second one you could answer it in exactly the same way - the only difference is that the examiner won't be explicitly looking for those references to 'fair' etc sprinkled through (although it would be REALLY hard to evaluate procedures without *any* mention of time, cost, complexity, etc, so it's seriously not anything to worry about!).

Generally it's the *task* word that tells you how to structure your answer: not the content words. And, even then, there's a lot of individual preference involved.

Thank you very much for the clarification! I appreciate it!

[HasibA]

Cases when applied correctly, show a really good understanding of knowledge. They are definitely not necessary in every question and are only really necessary when the question asks for it. However, like you mentioned, they are really good for supporting arguments in the larger 8-10 mark questions. I highly recommend using examples for 'evaluate' questions, so you can ensure you are arguing with some sort of legitimacy.
In smaller questions, they can be used to clarify the information you are supplying or support an argument you are making. (E.g. if you are talking about ways you can avoid precedent, you could use an example to show when avoiding precedent occurred) But again, is not necessary unless the question specifically asks for an example.

Does this help?

ahhh! that makes sense! thanks heaps! BTW, are you doing Legal Studies this year or have you already completed it?

[thaaanyan]

Question!! So if you got a q saying "Evaluate the adversary system." Do you need to evaluate all 5 features of the adversary system to get all 10 marks??? what if you wrote a lot on just 4 features??? if the 5th one necessary??
Thanks!