How did everyone go?

[SupaMario]

I also put 1 reform for the jury system aswell, incase.

[playsimme]

wait so what did everyone put for the avoiding precedent question? I basically phrased it how I liked it so I could discuss bleeping 5 marks...

[iliketurtles]

How the hell do civil pre-trial procedures promote access?....

[Zafaraaaa]

What did you guys put for the 5 marker about avoiding precedent.. I said the position of the court affected if it could be avoided/ distinguishing but generally they follow it

For that Q. I had to hurry back to it in the last 4 mins
Would I get ANY marks for:
-> Defining what precedent is/how courts use it to make law
-> Mentioning how judges of superior or higher courts can make precedent and that its binding on lower courts and 'ratio decidendi'
-> Mentioning how the precedent of a different court in a different court hierarchy does not need to be followed as its persuasive precedent
-> Mentioning how the lower court precedent, being persuasive, doesnt need to be followed by the higher courts and that they can avoid it by Reversing, overruling, distinguishing, disapproving

I know this is all wrong hahaha but in the last 4 mins I was panicked like bad and I didn't know much about this Q to begin with So would I get any marks?? At least 2/5?

[iliketurtles]

and for the question that asked, for an example of utilising the media to influence a change in the law, which one did you all do?....I didn't know any...so I bullshitted something about Worksafe ads which have been "emblazoned all over our televisions".

...not sure if that's acceptable.

[RobDog]

Glad that's over. Well done guys!
It feels so weird spending a whole year doing a subject like legal and learning and studying soo much, just to only have to apply not even a quarter of what we know in the exam.

[playsimme]

What did you guys put for the 5 marker about avoiding precedent.. I said the position of the court affected if it could be avoided/ distinguishing but generally they follow it

For that Q. I had to hurry back to it in the last 4 mins
Would I get ANY marks for:
-> Defining what precedent is/how courts use it to make law
-> Mentioning how judges of superior or higher courts can make precedent and that its binding on lower courts and 'ratio decidendi'
-> Mentioning how the precedent of a different court in a different court hierarchy does not need to be followed as its persuasive precedent
-> Mentioning how the lower court precedent, being persuasive, doesnt need to be followed by the higher courts and that they can avoid it by Reversing, overruling, distinguishing, disapproving

I know this is all wrong hahaha but in the last 4 mins I was panicked like bad and I didn't know much about this Q to begin with So would I get any marks?? At least 2/5?

That's good - probs more than 2/5.. but the thing is I tried to relate it to the question as best as possible.. so I didn't explain precedent in depth but I just said the position of the court affected everything

[Zafaraaaa]

and for the question that asked, for an example of utilising the media to influence a change in the law, which one did you all do?....I didn't know any...so I bullshitted something about Worksafe ads which have been "emblazoned all over our televisions".
...not sure if that's acceptable.

I just talked about anti-abortion groups within the community who try to change the abortion laws by going on current affairs or having feature articles in newspapers to get their views heard and generate awareness for both the public and Parliament regarding law reform for abortion - I almost missed reading the "use of the media" and was about to start writing on petitions..hahaha

[izzykose]

I think i may have fucked the extended response...

I was going to discuss one alternative, one reform and strengths and weaknesses. I ran out of time and only discussed alternatives and reforms and the role of the VLRC. I did the reform and alternative with alot of detail 3/4 page each.. Could i get a decent score for it 5/10 (not really acceptable but better that the 2 i think im getting..)

[iliketurtles]

I think i may have fucked the extended response...

I was going to discuss one alternative, one reform and strengths and weaknesses. I ran out of time and only discussed alternatives and reforms and the role of the VLRC. I did the reform and alternative with alot of detail 3/4 page each.. Could i get a decent score for it 5/10 (not really acceptable but better that the 2 i think im getting..)

WE WERE SUPPOSE TO TALK ABOUT REFORMS/ALTERNATIVES?
SHIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET.

[Zafaraaaa]

I think i may have fucked the extended response...

I was going to discuss one alternative, one reform and strengths and weaknesses. I ran out of time and only discussed alternatives and reforms and the role of the VLRC. I did the reform and alternative with alot of detail 3/4 page each.. Could i get a decent score for it 5/10 (not really acceptable but better that the 2 i think im getting..)

OMG did it say to mention an alternative and reform??  

[kamb0z]

I think i may have fucked the extended response...

I was going to discuss one alternative, one reform and strengths and weaknesses. I ran out of time and only discussed alternatives and reforms and the role of the VLRC. I did the reform and alternative with alot of detail 3/4 page each.. Could i get a decent score for it 5/10 (not really acceptable but better that the 2 i think im getting..)

OMG did it say to mention an alternative and reform??  

It didn't say to discuss an alternative or a reform... it said to evaluate whether you agree with the quote, which was to abolish the jury system.
So it was basically a strength and weakness question in relation to the jury system, and then outline the role of the VLRC...

[baco43]

I say it was pretty crucial to include some discussion of alternatives/reforms to the jury system, because remember in the stimulus material it asked whether it should be 'abolished'. To address the 'outdated' part we needed to talk about strengths and weaknesses (which of course everyone did).

[izzykose]

No.. read my question, i wanted to talk about strengths and weaknesses. But i ran out of time and talked about reforms and alternatives only. Within it i stated about problems with the legal system, why thats a problem and how there are alternatives and reforms. What could i get with that :S

[playsimme]

I think i may have fucked the extended response...

I was going to discuss one alternative, one reform and strengths and weaknesses. I ran out of time and only discussed alternatives and reforms and the role of the VLRC. I did the reform and alternative with alot of detail 3/4 page each.. Could i get a decent score for it 5/10 (not really acceptable but better that the 2 i think im getting..)

OMG did it say to mention an alternative and reform??  

It didn't say to discuss an alternative or a reform... it said to evaluate whether you agree with the quote, which was to abolish the jury system.
So it was basically a strength and weakness question in relation to the jury system, and then outline the role of the VLRC...

Did we have to EVALUATE? I just spammed 4 strengths and 4 weaknesses right after.. I just said to an extent would that be alright?