VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[HopefulLawStudent]

I think I use either the preposition 'under' or maybe 'in' - but I think worrying about prepositions is going above and beyond!

More importantly, I feel like you're forgetting it's a strictly criteria content question on the wording. Check the Assessor's Report, but I'm pretty sure the marks would be allocated only to getting the jurisdiction right - no elaboration or detail or discussion or anything. So don't repeat the question at the start of the first sentence: waste of time. Also, I'd personally say "the most serious" indictable offences; and, I would NOT say 'above $200,000' or anything along those lines because amount of damages is not how jurisdiction is decided. It's complexity of the case: either complex facts or law, or a question of precedent. Basically, something the CC can't do, or can't do as well.

So we just never mention amounts?? Is that the same for if they ask for the CC's orig civil jurisdiction? (i.e. we don't say that it's generally between $100,000 - $200,000)??

Would this be a better answer?

It can hear cases dealing with most serious indictable offences, such as murder and murder-related offences. Its original civil jurisdiction is unlimited though it will typically deal with more complex cases than the cases dealt with in the Civil Court.

[phurell]

Is it vital to know for the exam how to evaluate criminal/civil pre-trial procedures when talking about an effective legal system?

[Elleeen]

Was wondering if anyone can clarify that this is suitable information for "problems and difficulties faced by individuals" and " recent changes and recommendation" that would overcome these (in order to make the system more effective).

I've only learned 2 problems, and one recent change and recommendation relating to each, so I'd also like to know if this is enough?

Problem: financial inequities impacting on access to the legal system
Recent change: compulsory mediation in the Supreme Court civil pre-trial proceedings.
Recommendation: Abolishing juries to reduce the cost, as well as to reduce the time taken to reach a verdict which also impacts on $$.

Problem: Delays in the legal system impacting the timely resolution of disputes.
Recent change: Increased use of ADR in the courts (such as through the establishment of court: magistrate/judge-led mediation) reduces the time it takes for disputes to be resolved, opening up more court time for other cases.
Recommendation: Extending court hours.

Of course I have these in much more in detail and with evaluations, but I'm just wondering if these are valid?

[reards]

Was wondering if anyone can clarify that this is suitable information for "problems and difficulties faced by individuals" and " recent changes and recommendation" that would overcome these (in order to make the system more effective).

I've only learned 2 problems, and one recent change and recommendation relating to each, so I'd also like to know if this is enough?

Problem: financial inequities impacting on access to the legal system
Recent change: compulsory mediation in the Supreme Court civil pre-trial proceedings.
Recommendation: Abolishing juries to reduce the cost, as well as to reduce the time taken to reach a verdict which also impacts on $$.

Problem: Delays in the legal system impacting the timely resolution of disputes.
Recent change: Increased use of ADR in the courts (such as through the establishment of court: magistrate/judge-led mediation) reduces the time it takes for disputes to be resolved, opening up more court time for other cases.
Recommendation: Extending court hours.

Of course I have these in much more in detail and with evaluations, but I'm just wondering if these are valid?

These two are good, it wouldn't hurt doing a recent change and recommendation to enhance a fair and unbiased hearing because I believe they can ask you that specifically (correct me if I am wrong)

[SexGodDosia]

Is it vital to know for the exam how to evaluate criminal/civil pre-trial procedures when talking about an effective legal system?

There was an 8 marker on this in 2014 so id say definitely, usually link it to VCAT

[meganrobyn]

So we just never mention amounts?? Is that the same for if they ask for the CC's orig civil jurisdiction? (i.e. we don't say that it's generally between $100,000 - $200,000)??

Would this be a better answer?

The Chief Assessor has said literally every time it's been on the exam that the amounts are incorrect. So, yeah, don't write them. (I mean, except for the Mag's: the legislation says $100k)

Was wondering if anyone can clarify that this is suitable information for "problems and difficulties faced by individuals" and " recent changes and recommendation" that would overcome these (in order to make the system more effective).

I've only learned 2 problems, and one recent change and recommendation relating to each, so I'd also like to know if this is enough?

Problem: financial inequities impacting on access to the legal system
Recent change: compulsory mediation in the Supreme Court civil pre-trial proceedings.
Recommendation: Abolishing juries to reduce the cost, as well as to reduce the time taken to reach a verdict which also impacts on $$.

Problem: Delays in the legal system impacting the timely resolution of disputes.
Recent change: Increased use of ADR in the courts (such as through the establishment of court: magistrate/judge-led mediation) reduces the time it takes for disputes to be resolved, opening up more court time for other cases.
Recommendation: Extending court hours.

Of course I have these in much more in detail and with evaluations, but I'm just wondering if these are valid?

I think your first recent reform is too old. Compulsory mediation in the SC has been around longer than 2010 (unless I'm wrong and you know the date of the practice rule or legislation...?).

Your second recent reform is also too old and too vague.

I'd grab a textbook and brush up on a few replacements. Also, to be safe, I'd personally have more than two - even just three is safer.

[Elleeen]

The Chief Assessor has said literally every time it's been on the exam that the amounts are incorrect. So, yeah, don't write them. (I mean, except for the Mag's: the legislation says $100k)

I think your first recent reform is too old. Compulsory mediation in the SC has been around longer than 2010 (unless I'm wrong and you know the date of the practice rule or legislation...?).

Your second recent reform is also too old and too vague.

I'd grab a textbook and brush up on a few replacements. Also, to be safe, I'd personally have more than two - even just three is safer.

Yeah that's exactly why I was concerned -- both changes I think are from 2009 or 2010. Thankfully I did start to learn some newer ones yesterday.

I'll definitely take you on that advice, so thanks!

[EdwinJS]

I think your first recent reform is too old. Compulsory mediation in the SC has been around longer than 2010 (unless I'm wrong and you know the date of the practice rule or legislation...?).

Your second recent reform is also too old and too vague.

I'd grab a textbook and brush up on a few replacements. Also, to be safe, I'd personally have more than two - even just three is safer.

Being Devil's advocate here, VCAA has never stated what 'recent' is, I know 5 years some about right and they do expect the students to be up to date with live knowledge but they can't necessarily mark you down for having an old case.

[Glasses]

Being Devil's advocate here, VCAA has never stated what 'recent' is, I know 5 years some about right and they do expect the students to be up to date with live knowledge but they can't necessarily mark you down for having an old case.

I think they would mark you down for having an example that they don't find "recent." It might depend on which examiner you get, but I'd say that you might struggle to get full marks with an example that isn't "recent" as such.
Megan is a VCAA examiner (and lecturer/author/previous lawyer/heaps of other cool stuff), so I'd take her word as Gospel haha.

[EdwinJS]

I think they would mark you down for having an example that they don't find "recent." It might depend on which examiner you get, but I'd say that you might struggle to get full marks with an example that isn't "recent" as such.
Megan is a VCAA examiner (and lecturer/author/previous lawyer/heaps of other cool stuff), so I'd take her word as Gospel haha.

So are cases like Brislan and the Tasmanian Dam Case considered not recent? If so, what examples can be used for High Court interpretation instead?

[HopefulLawStudent]

Being Devil's advocate here, VCAA has never stated what 'recent' is, I know 5 years some about right and they do expect the students to be up to date with live knowledge but they can't necessarily mark you down for having an old case.

While the term ‘recent’ is not defined in the study design, students are expected to keep up-to-date with recent changes to the legal system and should be familiar with changes that have taken place in the last few years.  - VCAA, 2014

Suggests that they do in fact care to some extent and who knows, 2016 could be the year that they decide they really care sooooo...

[upandgo]

hi everyone, which court would hear treason at first instance? i believed it was the supreme court, due to it being a serious matter, but the textbook said it was the high court... any clarification would be appreciated 

[HopefulLawStudent]

hi everyone, which court would hear treason at first instance? i believed it was the supreme court, due to it being a serious matter, but the textbook said it was the high court... any clarification would be appreciated 

I'd personally say high court, generally cos Supreme Court tends to deal with Vic matters and treason's generally more of a Australian/national thing?? <-- What I think anyway.

[nm4065]

I'd personally say high court, generally cos Supreme Court tends to deal with Vic matters and treason's generally more of a Australian/national thing?? <-- What I think anyway.

If I understand correctly, the HC does not have any original crimminal jurisdiction. Treason is within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (TD) but not the County Court, so most likely the Supreme Court, or perhaps in some Federal instances the Federal Court.

[Glasses]

So are cases like Brislan and the Tasmanian Dam Case considered not recent? If so, what examples can be used for High Court interpretation instead?

No they're fine! I was referring to recent changes in the legal system (as part of Unit 4 AOS 2). - Not the case studies.