Legal Studies Exam Discussion

[Flor]

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..

Hmm, well,I agreed completely, but I talked about more than just faster and cheaper. I made sure to state it in my intro though. So, I guess if you indicated it in your intro, you should be fine? Idk though :S

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

Tbh, not sure. I did it though.

[pumpkinbread]

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

Yeah I did it too

[rach95]

Really good exam! Just wondering, the last question- I interpreted it as 'evaluate the adversary system and compare two of its features with the inquisitorial system' is that right? Then I spoke about 4 features of adversary and COMPARED and sort of evaluated those with the inquisitorial. Then the rest of the adversary features I just evaluated in relation to how they achieve a fair and unbiased hearing. Was that right or was it just compare two features??

[TheWackyCheese]

I think the exam was straightforward enough. Ran out of time on the last question so I missed out a final comparison of one inquistorial feature. I think I may have left a thing or two out of my answers. Was the Tasmanian Dam case alright to use for High Court interpretation? I discussed it's impact but I didn't remember mention anything about interpretation I don't think and I didn't repeat the case facts at least.
For the court of appeal one, I said that it was neither higher or lower in the court hierarchy so it was not bound by it's previous decisions. I didn't mention disapproval or distinguishing because I filled up my lines and i thought my answer was sufficient. For the 2 dispute resolution methods used by the courts, would that have involved discussing ADR and Judicial Determination, Arbitration and Judicial determination or any ADR because I just used Mediation and Arbitration because they were methods used by the courts. (The courts would refer cases to ADR as a method of resolving the disputes). Not sure if it's right, hopefully I get a good mark. Got 100% on most sacs this year (Even though they will get standardised) so if I do good hopefully I get a good final score!

[lloyd18]

with the court of appeal question you didnt have to mention dissaprove or distinguish that is irrelevant, you must say that because the decisions of the court are at the same level in the heirarchy it is not a binding precedent, but only persuasive, thus the court of appeal doesnt have to follow past decisions.

also dissaproving works two ways. (1) lower court dissaproves precedent made in higher court through obiter dictum but must follow cause they are bound. (2) same level they can disaaprove the precedent and establish there own precedent as the precedent previously set is not binding, just persuasive, so what that leaves is two precedents.

[lloyd18]

Hmm, well,I agreed completely, but I talked about more than just faster and cheaper. I made sure to state it in my intro though. So, I guess if you indicated it in your intro, you should be fine? Idk though :S
Tbh, not sure. I did it though.

you could talk about as many concepts as you wanted but you had to mention those two, so you could of spoke about three things, but two of the things had to be the ones mentioned, marks are awarded for students being able to respond to stimulis.

[rhiannon-blick]

did anyone write about S109 for the restriction on law making on the states, that was correct yeah?

[lloyd18]

Were we supposed to evaluate the last question, the 10 marker? I did but a lot of girls in my cohort didn't..

you had to speak about the extent, so you have to refer to the degree that you disagree or agree with the statement, and provide reasons why generally through strengths and weaknesses, so yes it is very similar, but not exactly like an evaluation.

[Outclass]

did anyone write about S109 for the restriction on law making on the states, that was correct yeah?

Didnt write that myself, however it is correct

[mattbrown19]

How exactly do you ANALYSE  the impact of High Court cases in influencing the division of power?

I mean.. you can't really talk about one case (eg. tas dam) then say BOOM the Cwlth division of lawmaking changed and claim you have analysed the division of law-making??

[rhiannon-blick]

How exactly do you ANALYSE  the impact of High Court cases in influencing the division of power?

I mean.. you can't really talk about one case (eg. tas dam) then say BOOM the Cwlth division of lawmaking changed and claim you have analysed the division of law-making??

I AGREE oh my god, there is only so much you can write.

[rhiannon-blick]

Didnt write that myself, however it is correct

hope so, thanks for that!

[lloyd18]

In regard to the reform question, would it matter if you gave alternatives instead of reforms? Because I did, and I think that reforms could technically count as any change. I just forgot pretty much all 'reforms'. But technically a 'change in order to improve something', which is what the 'alternatives' are.

yeh it does matter, tbh technically they are different things according to vcaa and thats shown in exam papers that they mark, so unfortunately yes you had to exclusively mention reforms

[lloyd18]

This question was hard to elaborate on:
Q5B) about parliament cannot make laws that override decisions made by the supreme court of victoria??

is this statement correct or incorrect??

i said this is incorrect,

you are correct by stating 'incorrect'

[M_BONG]

Off topic; but I was just looking at past VCAA exams and never (in past 5 years) has VCAA put a 10, 8, 8, 7 mark question consecutively..usually it's one 10 marker and one 8 marker and then the rest of 5/6 markers.

There were very few 1-3 markers this year ( 3 questions only) so I guess it explains why a lot of us ran out of time :S

But dang I was predicting courts v parliament, doc precedent, Aus v another country to be on there so I only prepared for those haha guess you can't predict these things.