Seeking feedback for a practice exam

[maturegambino]

Hi! Newbie here. I'm not even sure if asking for feedback is allowed here but worth a shot!

I'm having trouble receiving some feedback for my practice exams in Legal Studies.

I also read on one of these threads that getting someone else to correct your legal studies exams is far more helpful than self correcting them.

Some indicative marks would be greatly welcomed, and any advice on how I should be wording my answers or if I've got any content muddled up.

Attached is a Unit 3 practice exam

[meganrobyn]

Normally I don't have time for outside correction, but you've caught me in a procrastination slump!! I can't attach to a PM, I don't think - should I upload it here...?

[maturegambino]

yeah sure! thank you so much

[meganrobyn]

yeah sure! thank you so much

My pleasure It's really not often I have time to do this.

Okay, so with my marking I have verged on the side of tough - mainly because I think there's absolutely no point getting soft marks. I am so sorry if any of my feedback is worded a little bluntly; I just kind of barrel through and write what comes to mind! But please know that this is correct, intelligent writing, and that I think you clearly know the course well

[maturegambino]

i really appreciate the feedback! thanks so much, i'll definitely use this to improve.

just a few questions to clarify
- how do i know when to include examples if the question doesn't specifically ask for it? i've always been reluctant to in some cases due to the time restraints
- none of my textbooks have outlined any examples in regards to VLRC, where can i find this content?
- how can i better relate the doctrine of precedent to the law making power of the courts?
- in any cases where i refer to sections to the Constitution, will the numbers be absolutely essential? will it add to my marks?

thanks again, really!

[TheWackyCheese]

I won't be able to confidently answer all those questions but examples for the VLRC include: Surveillance in Public Places (2010), Child Protections (2009), Abortion (2008 - This is the example I like to remember) and Bail (2007). I found those in the A+ Legal Notes book.

[michak]

i really appreciate the feedback! thanks so much, i'll definitely use this to improve.

just a few questions to clarify
- how do i know when to include examples if the question doesn't specifically ask for it? i've always been reluctant to in some cases due to the time restraints
- none of my textbooks have outlined any examples in regards to VLRC, where can i find this content?
- how can i better relate the doctrine of precedent to the law making power of the courts?
- in any cases where i refer to sections to the Constitution, will the numbers be absolutely essential? will it add to my marks?

thanks again, really!

- if it doesn't ask only put examples in if you think it will enhance your answer such as if you were talking about why laws needed changing and you mentioned new technology and said for example cameras on phones to protect privacy of people
-what do you mean about your precedent question? Doctrine of precedent or statutory interpretation is how the court makes law so if you get a court law making question would need to metion it
- numbers will just show you n is that bit extra more but aren't critical but do t make them up or you could lose marks

[maturegambino]

you're both awesome, thank you so much

[meganrobyn]

i really appreciate the feedback! thanks so much, i'll definitely use this to improve.

just a few questions to clarify
- how do i know when to include examples if the question doesn't specifically ask for it? i've always been reluctant to in some cases due to the time restraints
- none of my textbooks have outlined any examples in regards to VLRC, where can i find this content?
- how can i better relate the doctrine of precedent to the law making power of the courts?
- in any cases where i refer to sections to the Constitution, will the numbers be absolutely essential? will it add to my marks?

thanks again, really!

My pleasure

I use examples for that dreaded "second mark" - you know, the one where you've gotten the core answer or definition out, but are left with not enough detail or content. I illustrate with an example. Perhaps two lines.

Just hop on the VLRC website and check one of their recent reports! Then prep one sentence that basically says "In <year> the VLRC concluded their investigation into <topic>, and submitted a report to Government in which they recommended that <one or two key recommendations>." Something like that!

The doctrine of precedent is just the framework for when courts will follow each other's legal principles. How do you a find a court's "legal principle"? You look at the ratio decidendi of its decisions in cases. These decisions could be on the meaning of statute, or on the rule that should be followed in the absence of statute (eg negligence). How do you know whether the legal principle HAS to be followed in the new case or whether the new judge can choose? You look at the relationship of relevance and authority between the two. And so on. Then all you're doing is just going through each aspect of the whole "courts as law-makers" thing and seeing which parts give the courts a bit of law-making ability and flexibility, and which parts stop them from doing their own thing. Okay, I've just dug up my own answer to the 2012 question on this topic. It was done under exam conditions and I'm certainly NOT putting it forward as a perfect or model answer, but it might help you out a bit to read how someone else answers this kind of thing

Finally, Constitution section numbers: chuck them in if you know them. But I don't think you should stress. Just make sure you know s109 and s128!!

[maturegambino]

i feel so spoiled with all this feedback its perfect thank you x a million

[meganrobyn]

[tcstudent]

Sorry if someoene has said this but, for question 5a, you re-read this and tell me what you think?

This was the case in the Brislan case where the High Court had to interpret whether ‘postal, telegraphic, telephonic and other like services’ included wirelesses, which it concluded it did.

it should say, Interpret whether 'postal/telegraphic,telephone and other like services included wireless radio sets, thus after interpretation the high court had ruled that wireless radios where classified under 'other like services. and therefore brislan had to pay for the licence