ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE Business Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE Legal Studies => Topic started by: werdna on January 24, 2011, 12:56:11 pm
-
Hey guys, this is the thread I'm going to put all my questions and answers for Legal Studies in, so I can get some advice from you on how I've answered questions and how I should answer them and so on. :P
-
Does anyone know if we need to know about the 'effectiveness of the parliamentry system' in the Justice & Outcomes textbook? Key Concepts doesn't have a section on this.
-
I think the 'effectiveness of the parliamentry system' means the strengths and weaknesses of parliament as a law-making body (i.e. critically evaluate). I think you need to know it. Also in relation to your other PM, my teacher said that students should still do practice exams from the previous study design (i.e. 07', 08', 09'); as the changes are not that big. It's really minor changes/tweaks. The exams from the previous study design are still relevant.
-
isn't there a question thread?
-
isn't there a question thread?
Yes, but this one is for my questions, similar to what the Methods/Chem/Spec people have done on here. I also won't be asking questions as much, I'd be asking for advice on my answers and how to structure them instead as Legal isn't a hard subject like the maths/sciences above.
-
Could someone please mark these responses? I'm not 100% sure on how to structure responses, but here goes. In Legal, do you have to define the key terms like you do in BM? (Even when the question isn't a 'define..' one?)
Explain how conflicting opinions about a proposed change in the law can restrict the law-making process.
Conflicting opinions about a proposed change in the law can restrict the leglislative process. This is due to the fact that government must always adhere to the principles of a constitutional monarch, and hence responding to people's needs and representing the views of the majority of the people becomes second nature to government. A significant disparity between the will of the people and the will of the government, in terms of the law-making process, can cause the government of the day to be reluctant to change or initiate law without a clear majority view.
The ALP has a majority in the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly in Victoria. To what extent does this lead to effective law-making? Discuss.
The ALP has a majority in the Legislative Council and Legislative Assembly. Whilst the ALP must adhere to the principles of responsible and representative government during its term, and therefore reflect the views and values of the wider community irrespective of much political influence, this is only an effective legislative process to a certain extent; to the extent that bills should always be scrutinised and debated heavily before they become law. Members in both houses will inadvertently have the tendency to vote according to the decrees of their party or coalition and will therefore only merely act as a 'rubber stamp'. In addition to this, the ALP may misuse its political power during the process, and as a result, there is not as much scrutinisation, debate and discussion of bills in the majority government as there would be in a minority government. In this way, the Victorian Parliament may not be able to fulfil the needs of the general community, because both houses are bound and entrapped by their own ideologies and aims.
It's more of an issue of structuring responses, as the actual content in Legal is easy to understand. Thanks guys!
-
Both responses are very good. I won't give them a score or anything, since it may depend on the allocated marks for each question. You could possibly give an example for the first question? For example, the proposed change in the law relating to euthanasia; to make it legal - it's a heavily-debated issue, which raises many divided opinions. Hence, the government may be reluctant/cautious to pass laws that may lose potential voters. Your second answer is pretty good as well. You've full answered the question for both of them. Why not aim for 50? Going off what I've seen, you seem quite capable of achieving 50 for Legal Studies.
-
Thanks EPL, you legend. ;) These are just normal questions in the chapter, so there aren't any allocated marks. Thanks for letting me know about adding examples as well. :P A 50.... I don't think I should aim for it, because I'd be underestimating the difficulty in getting it... but it'd be an awesome if I did get it hahha.
-
Both of your answers are really good!
I would just suggest to add examples where possible. If you couldn't find any examples for these, then fair enough.
In my textbook from last year it says, (in relation to the first question) 'The suggestions that the use of marijuana should be decriminalised and that heroin should be made available to addicts are controversial and a great deal of public debate is required before the law can be changed.' - though that example isn't really ideal as there are no years or acts or case names to prove it as an example...
I don't know if you have seen in my post in another thread i outlined how to structure short-answer questions. I said "My teacher said to remember the word 'SEE'... write a Statement answering the question, add an Explanation and provide an Example."
The first sentence for both your questions is kind of just repeating the question TOO much, imo. For the second one i would start off by saying "When the ALP has a majority in the Legislative Council and Legislative Assembly parliament's ability to make laws are restricted."
edit- beaten by EPL
-
Thanks ech! Yeah, I did notice that about the first sentences. Will take this on board next time. :P
-
Could someone please mark these responses? I'm not 100% sure on how to structure responses, but here goes. In Legal, do you have to define the key terms like you do in BM? (Even when the question isn't a 'define..' one?)
Explain how conflicting opinions about a proposed change in the law can restrict the law-making process.
Conflicting opinions about a proposed change in the law can restrict the leglislative process. This is due to the fact that government must always adhere to the principles of a constitutional monarch, and hence responding to people's needs and representing the views of the majority of the people becomes second nature to government. A significant disparity between the will of the people and the will of the government, in terms of the law-making process, can cause the government of the day to be reluctant to change or initiate law without a clear majority view.
The ALP has a majority in the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly in Victoria. To what extent does this lead to effective law-making? Discuss.
The ALP has a majority in the Legislative Council and Legislative Assembly. Whilst the ALP must adhere to the principles of responsible and representative government during its term, and therefore reflect the views and values of the wider community irrespective of much political influence, this is only an effective legislative process to a certain extent; to the extent that bills should always be scrutinised and debated heavily before they become law. Members in both houses will inadvertently have the tendency to vote according to the decrees of their party or coalition and will therefore only merely act as a 'rubber stamp'. In addition to this, the ALP may misuse its political power during the process, and as a result, there is not as much scrutinisation, debate and discussion of bills in the majority government as there would be in a minority government. In this way, the Victorian Parliament may not be able to fulfil the needs of the general community, because both houses are bound and entrapped by their own ideologies and aims.
It's more of an issue of structuring responses, as the actual content in Legal is easy to understand. Thanks guys!
what you wrote was good, but in question two you needa cut down the bolded bit. That topic sentence type thing isn't needed and there's a bit of an emphasis on getting to the point quickly in legal studies (due to time constraints), I was always told to get into the nitty gritty of the question as fast as possible.
edit: why does ech_93 always beat me to answer legal questions :(
-
edit: why does ech_93 always beat me to answer legal questions :(
haha, sorry chrisjb... I'll let you have the next one! ;D
-
Thanks for that chrisjb! :)
In Legal, do you have to define the key terms like you do in BM? (Even when the question isn't a 'define..' one?)
-
In Legal, do you have to define the key terms like you do in BM? (Even when the question isn't a 'define..' one?)
I don't think so. For example, if the question asked "Critically evaluate two strengths and weaknesses of parliament as a law-making body" - I don't think you would define parliament (i.e. structure, role and so on). Though it's not the greatest example, I hope my point makes some sense. If the question doesn't ask you to "define" terms within the question, then I wouldn't; you'd be wasting time if you did. That's just me. Ask your teacher? That's the safest bet.
-
I can't seem to find any relevant examples or 'real-life evidence' for the following in AOS1:
- representative and responsible government
- separation of powers
- roles of the houses and Crown
If you have any useful examples to use in questions referring to the above, could you please help? Thanks guys!
-
Not sure if you explained above, but what do you mean real-life examples?
As in how do they operate in Australia?
Well representative govt because we vote them in, responsible because they are accountable to us.
Sep of Powers isn't really distinct in australia as legislature forms the exectuive in a sense, however the crown is the exec. technically.
If this is what you mean ill explain the last one and first two in detail.
-
Thanks. I meant more so examples and evidence to support my answers - like real-life events that demonstrated how a principle worked. So stuff like case studies and Australian occurrences that may have depicted some legal principles in action. It's hard to find some relevant pieces of evidence for representative/responsible government, separation of powers and the roles of all the houses.. :P
-
I asked my teacher about using specific cases / examples when answering questions about principles such as Rep. Govt, Sep powers etc.
She said that you don't need to for the first 2 dot points of AOS1.
Reasons why laws change is when you should start to use examples in your answers :)
-
Awesome, that seems about right. :P I think the first two dot points are more about facts. The rest of AOS1, you can expand on the ideas far more. But does anyone have any specific real-life examples to use for the rep/res govt, sep of powers and roles of the houses? I'm going to have to put in some examples just in case, because I'm not exactly sure what my teacher wants.
-
Brainstorm, eg. Rep Govt - Kevin Rudd/Climate Change
-
Could someone please check over my answers for structure/content/etc? Thanks!
Q9c from Learning Activity 2.1 from J&O.
To what extent will this change in the law help to protect people in society?
This change in the law will only help to protect people in society to the extent that offenders would most likely be identified and prosecuted as necessary. However, this may not always be the case, which is the downfall to the Crimes Amendment (Identity Crime) Act 2009 (Vic), which fails to '[do] more to help victims'. As an example, victims can only apply (to the court) for a certificate showing that their identity has been stolen, given that the offender has been identified and charged accordingly. In this way, the Act isn't as effective as it could be in protecting individuals and their rights, as the crux of the dispute resolution process relies predominantly on the identification and later prosecution of the identity crime offender, which is not guaranteed.
Q3 from Learning Activity 2.1 from J&O.
Why is it necessary for a society’s legal system to reflect the values of that society?
It is necessary for a society's legal system to reflect the values of that society because laws would be far more socially-applicable, relevant and acceptable to the people, and members of the community would be less inclined to disobey or abuse the law. Whenever specific laws are no longer acceptable to the majority of the people due to changes in social values and attitudes, the law must be amended to suit and complement such views. A failure to do so would corrupt the system of government that is ought to be followed - a representative, constitutional democracy. As an example, social values have evolved in relation to the matter of same-sex marriages, and so law-makers have responded to these calls for action and have amended the Relationships Act 2008 (Vic) to ensure that there is equality and justice for all members of the community, regardless of their sexuality.
Q1 from Learning Activity 2.5 from J&O
What is the role of the VLRC?
The role of the Victorian Law Reform Commission is to undertake research and make recommendations for changes in the law on matters that are referred to it by the state attorney-general (or minor legal issues that do not necessitate any references). It also works towards educating the community on areas of law relevant to its work, as well as monitoring and coordinating law reform activity in Victoria.
-
Wow, your answers are really good in both content and structure. I would just add a bit more detail into your last question.
Just off the top of my head;- the VLRC also ask for submissions from the public
- get some experts to do more research on the area of law
- make a report and give it to the Vic Parliament
you will have more in your book though
Really good answers though!
-
Yep, I see what you've done there. :P Adding the processes of the VLRC and everything. Thanks ech!
-
Great answers there werdna! But yeah, just add in the process of investigation undertaken by the VLRC.
-
Thanks for the suggestion.
-
Just something I've noticed in both your sets of questions - you always seem to repeat the question. This is uneccesary if you are responding directly to it (ie. you've already written it out, or it's written out for you), and I've been strongly discouraged from doing it as it wastes space and time and apparently its a pet hate of examiners for the end of year exams. Just something to keep in mind :)
Your answers are good, but I would make sure to include that the VLRC are an independent law reform body - their independence from parliament is a key point.
-
Thanks LeahT! :P
-
I think you can talk about the relative difficulty of each method that may alter the division of law-making powers.
Cover referendum, high court interpretation and referral of powers with a paragraph each, talking about 2 strengths and their corresponding weaknesses, then rounding up back to the difficulty of that method.
How many words is this meant to be?
-
Thanks Liuy. Not too sure on word limit, I'd imagine it'd be maybe 800/900 words?
Does there need to be a distinct intro and conclusion?
Yeh, I would think you'd need to have an introduction and conclusion. I had a similar task like yours, though we didn't have to do an essay. I just did what Liuy said. In your introduction, you could briefly outline the different methods of changing the law-making powers between the Commonwealth and states, then go into each method in more detail in your body paragraphs. The conclusion could just summarise what you've said in your body paragraphs. Does the essay count towards anything?
-
Wow, thats fairly long.
yea, what EPL said :)
oh yea, maybe also mention the Constitution and how it divides law-making power briefly before going onto the methods.
-
Hey werdna, PM me the essay when you're finished and I'd be happy to have a look at it for you if you'd like.
-
Can someone please go over my answers and see where I can improve? Thanks!
1. Distinguish between a summary offence and an indictable offence.
A summary offence is a minor criminal offence that is heard in the Magistrates' Court. Examples of summary offences include careless driving, offensive behaviour and property damage. An indictable offence, on the other hand, is a more serious criminal offence for which the accused is entitled to a trial before a judge and jury in a higher court. Examples of indictable offences include perjury, attempted murder and burglary.
For this question I wasn't sure if I needed to mention that some indictable offences can be tried summarily, decided against doing this as the question asked to 'distinguish' and make the distinction between the two. But if I should have mentioned it, let me know! :P
2. Describe the appellate jurisdiction of the County Court.
Under the County Court's appellate jurisdiction for criminal cases, appeals can be made on the grounds of conviction and/or the severity or leniency of a sentence handed down by the Magistrates' Court. After conducting a full rehearing, the County Court can decide to let the magistrate's decision stand and dismiss the appeal, quash the conviction or amend (increase or decrease) the sentence. It has no appellate jurisdiction for civil cases, except under a specific act of law under which it is allowed to hear appeals of civil matters.
-
Spot on.
-
Really?! :P Thanks flasha! Finally some good after doing legal for 3 days straight.. this is draining stuff haha
-
Legals kills you. It's so dry and uninspiring.
-
A couple of questions:
1. If arbitration is generally seen as a last resort, why are civil claims under $10,000 referred to compulsory arbitration? Why couldn't these civil disputes be referred to different ADRs?
2. What exactly is judicial determination? By what I can understand, it's just fancy legal terminology masking what we already know? Ie. the ordinary court process?
3. Is it crucial to know ALL the uses of the dispute resolution methods? Eg. Arbitration List in the Commercial Court of Supreme Court etc.
Thanks for any help guys!
-
2. Yes, what you've said is right. Judicial determination and the process of going to court are essentially the same thing. It's a term which has been coined in the new study design this year for no real reason in my opinion.
3. No, you don't need to know all the uses of dispute resolution methods. Knowing what arbitration, conciliation and mediation are (their definitions) and their strengths and weaknesses are enough.
I'm not sure about the first question.
-
2. Yes, what you've said is right. Judicial determination and the process of going to court are essentially the same thing. It's a term which has been coined in the new study design this year for no real reason in my opinion.
3. No, you don't need to know all the uses of dispute resolution methods. Knowing what arbitration, conciliation and mediation are (their definitions) and their strengths and weaknesses are enough.
I'm not sure about the first question.
Thanks for the help man. :P Two more questions - not sure how to answer these ones:
1. Distinguish between judicial determination and alternative methods of dispute resolution.
2. Evaluate the way in which courts operate to resolve disputes. - not exactly sure on how to structure this answer, do I write a statement on how effective it is overall at the end?
-
2. Yes, what you've said is right. Judicial determination and the process of going to court are essentially the same thing. It's a term which has been coined in the new study design this year for no real reason in my opinion.
3. No, you don't need to know all the uses of dispute resolution methods. Knowing what arbitration, conciliation and mediation are (their definitions) and their strengths and weaknesses are enough.
I'm not sure about the first question.
Thanks for the help man. :P Two more questions - not sure how to answer these ones:
1. Distinguish between judicial determination and alternative methods of dispute resolution.
2. Evaluate the way in which courts operate to resolve disputes. - not exactly sure on how to structure this answer, do I write a statement on how effective it is overall at the end?
For the second question I would talk about pre-trial procedures (have you studied that yet??). I think thats what they mean by 'operates'. Yes for any evaluate question I would write a paragraph/conclusion on effectiveness.
-
For the 2nd question it's on the strengths and weaknesses of courts in dispute resolution - I'm just not sure how I should structure the answer. How many paragraphs should I write for an 'evaluate' question, and how is this different to a 'critically evaluate'? (question wasn't allocated number of marks)
Also for the 1st question have you got a rough idea of what the differences between the two are? It's a bit hard to find different characteristics when judicial determination isn't an ADR. :/
-
essentially judicial determination is just the process of resolving a case in court, so it's basically asking you to compare the operation of courts with alternative dispute resolution methods. Some differences include cost, time consumption etc.
for the Strengths and weaknesses question, I would discuss 3 strengths and 3 weaknesses, writing a conclusion about the overall effectiveness in the end. I do not think there is an explicit difference between critically evaluate and simple evaluate.