How did you go?

[Dejan]

Wasn't the last question about Section 128 and how the Constitution protects human rights? I don't remember it stating specifically structural protections, although it would be good to talk about them. Also it asked for a high court case about rights.

I think it was (not sure), something about protecting rights and a high court case

[Dejan]

it didn't specifically say human or structural it said rights in australia.

Really o.0?

[ThyJovan]

Yes Dejo, kicking myself that I didn't state structural protection though

[akmaljamal]

the high court case had to be structural, but the rest was rights in general, i am pretty sure.

[ThyJovan]

the high court case had to be structural, but the rest was rights in general, i am pretty sure.

Not really, I used the Lange vs ABC case, teacher said it was fine.

[sunintherain]

I did royal assent for the first one, I didn't think this exam was that easy to be honest. I felt that a lot of the questions required a fair amount of thought and were quite open for interpretation, I think the last question said this:
The Australian constitution effectively protects rights in many ways, in part section 128
To what extent do you agree with this statement, in your answer refer to one high court case in regards to the protection of rights
^not exact but similar to this

[sam-17]

the question was to discuss rights in Australia and the extent to which s.128 protect rights. You could have said that while it protects entrenched (express rights), there are other forms of protection such as implied rights via interpretation of the High Court (using the Australian Capital Television or Lange case) and structural rights.

As long you had some sort of discussion relevant to the question you should be fine.

[Dejan]

The question was to discuss rights in Australia and the extent to which s.128 protect rights. You could have said that while it protects entrenched (express rights), there are other forms of protection such as implied rights via interpretation of the High Court (using the Australian Capital Television case) and structural rights.

As long you had some sort of discussion relevant to the question you should be fine.

I though it was just structural :/, but thanks for clearing up the confusion

[sadboy222]

explain one reason why states refer their powers?

I just said inconsistency and gave an example e.g. ex-nuptial children in  family law matters

[RockyStarPro]

explain one reason why states refer their powers?

I just said inconsistency and gave an example e.g. ex-nuptial children in  family law matters

I wrote down states may refer their powers in cases involving terrorism or international corporate matter. Hope that was okay too haha.

Back to that royal assent/proclamation question number 1. It stated what stage was outlined in that exerpt, which I'm pretty sure was a Royal assent

[daniela.darienzo]

I just saw the word assented and went for it hahaha

LOL THIS!

i didnt even read it all i saw as ".......Governor-General.......................... assent......"

my mind was like yep royal assent lol

Hahaha.. I did exactly the same thing!!!

[sam-17]

What did everyone put for the question about the extent to which damages compensates the plaintiff? I said that some damages eg. compensatory offer compensation to cover expenses as well as pain and suffering but there are other damages which do not seek to compensate the plaintiff (eg. contemptuous damages, exemplary damages & nominal damages)

 

[Dejan]

What did everyone put for the question about the extent to which damages compensates the plaintiff? I said that some damages eg. compensatory offer compensation to cover expenses as well as pain and suffering but there are other damages which do not seek to compensate the plaintiff (eg. contemptuous damages, exemplary damages & nominal damages)

 

I said that both the purpose can't and can be achieved but it didn't include all the damages

[daniela.darienzo]

What do you guys think will be the cut off for an A+? 

[Dejan]

What do you guys think will be the cut off for an A+? 

60