Legal Studies Exam Discussion

[jeanweasley]

You could also add that if that precedent has been abrogated (declared as no longer a 'good law') then that precedent will no longer exist.


Yes, And I also agree with the above post. They could have cut at least one question out but overall, I was happy with my progress.

[M_BONG]

Feeling really good about that exam. Only complaint was the length or maybe that was just me writing too much.

With 1b I used distinguishing.

but doesnt disfinguishing imply it  was bound at the first place? idk i might be wrong.

plus its only worth two marks!!

[asli95]

How did you guys find the last question?

I had 15 minutes left and I wrote only 2 pages. Does that mean that I cannot get a high mark, because they gave us 3 pages?

Plus, I found the question really narrow. You were only allowed to talk about two features of the adversary system, compare, and relate it to one element of an effective legal system.


Is it just me or did you guys struggled to find enough points?

I waffled on about cultural barriers/indigenous people

omg same! i literally had 15 mins to writ and literally wrote about the judge and legal rep and how it results in fair and unbiased hearing for adversary but not inquisitorial

[Flor]

did you have to mention disapproval of the previous precedent?

I said it could disapprove :S

[jeanweasley]

but doesnt disfinguishing imply it  was bound at the first place? idk i might be wrong.

plus its only worth two marks!!

'Its previous decisions' attests to the fact that they were bound, methinks, otherwise, why would it have been there in the first place.

@ Flor
If they disapprove it, they would still have to follow it, unless the higher court (High Court) reverses the precedent on appeal or overrules the lower court's precedent.

[vashappenin]

Guys don't waste time stressing over whether you got the answer right or wrong. Honestly, you can't do anything about it now- what's done is done. Also, you're probably more likely to remember your mistakes walking out, so try to avoid thinking about it. Maybe wait for suggested solutions as well before actually confirming your answers!

[Flor]

'Its previous decisions' attests to the fact that they were bound, methinks, otherwise, why would it have been there in the first place.

@ Flor
If they disapprove it, they would still have to follow it, unless the higher court (High Court) reverses the precedent on appeal or overrules the lower court's precedent.

I thought disapproving on the same level worked differently. It would create two contradictory sets of precedents.

[jeanweasley]

I thought disapproving on the same level worked differently. It would create two contradictory sets of precedents.

According to my teacher disapproved precedent still has to be followed? Anywho, I guess we'll find out later. Time to relax WOOOO!!

[maree271]

Finished with 18 mins left and went over everything....not sure if I didn't write as much as I should have or all those practice exams payed off?

[asli95]

According to my teacher disapproved precedent still has to be followed? Anywho, I guess we'll find out later. Time to relax WOOOO!!

yea it is. even though they disapprove it they still have to follow it but state it in their judgment that they were forced to do so. But thats for lower courts following precedent from superior courts only isnt it?

[pumpkinbread]

What did everyone get for the question about the courts using two dispute resolution methods?

Was it meant to be mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial? Because I thought that those methods were by tribunals and not courts... but I wrote them down anyway haha

[MrCommerce]

What did everyone get for the question about the courts using two dispute resolution methods?

Was it meant to be mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial? Because I thought that those methods were by tribunals and not courts... but I wrote them down anyway haha

All forms of ADR are employed by BOTH the courts and VCAT. So i used judicial determination and mediation. (Correct me if i'm wrong :S)

[Flor]

What did everyone get for the question about the courts using two dispute resolution methods?

Was it meant to be mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial? Because I thought that those methods were by tribunals and not courts... but I wrote them down anyway haha

Yeah -- that's right! These dispute resolution methods are also used in the courts Also, I think you only had to talk about 2?

All forms of ADR are employed by BOTH the courts and VCAT. So i used judicial determination and mediation. (Correct me if i'm wrong :S)

Defs not wrong! Any two would do. Anyways, did you give an example of how it's used at the courts?

[M_BONG]

I'm sorry if I come about sounding too stressed, but it's cuz I only have one 3/4 to worry about.

By the way,
for the VCAT vs Courts question, the question was, from memory something like "VCAT is always the better option as it is faster and cheaper than courts".

Would you be allowed to talk about something other than cost and time or did your arguments had to stick to those two points only? I talked about limited right to appeal from VCAT decisions..

[Outclass]

Yeah -- that's right! These dispute resolution methods are also used in the courts Also, I think you only had to talk about 2?

 

Defs not wrong! Any two would do. Anyways, did you give an example of how it's used at the courts?

Did you have to also state when it was used?... Did it just in case but nearly cost me in the end.