legal vce exam answers

[lloyd18]

What do you reckon you will need for a 40 considering the relatively easy paper, at least a 65/70?

nah man thats prob will get 43/45
if your sacs are pretty good than probs 62 around

[akeergar]

yeh you are correct it cannot change the decision, however all it was really focusing on was the precdent that being the decision.
who cares its a couple marks you can still get a very high mark
good luck

Yeah thats true. Thank you!

[EstherR]

basically- the analysis would conssit with a strength and weakness for each. eg referendums a strength is that due to the double majority provision a proposal will only be successful if it has widespread support from the community. However a weakness is that it is costly eg 1999 refernda cost around 66 million.
in addition to what you said that would get the marks the mark allocation would go as such: example two marks and strength and weakness- two marks x2

wait, so the question was using one referendum and one high court case, analyse the impact of referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers
the question is not asking us to analyse the referendum process or h.c interpretation... it is asking us to analyse the impact of the referendum process on the division of law making power in the cases,  therefore youre analyzing the cases in respect to the referendum not stating the strengths and weaknesses of a referendum.... even in respect to the cases, all you have to say is how it chnages division of law making powers in respect to the cases..
Idk, i read that question very carefull and technically that is what it's asking

[akeergar]

wait, so the question was using one referendum and one high court case, analyse the impact of referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers
the question is not asking us to analyse the referendum process or h.c interpretation... it is asking us to analyse the impact of the referendum process on the division of law making power in the cases,  therefore youre analyzing the cases in respect to the referendum not stating the strengths and weaknesses of a referendum.... even in respect to the cases, all you have to say is how it chnages division of law making powers in respect to the cases..
Idk, i read that question very carefull and technically that is what it's asking

Same! I spent a couple of lines explaining facts of the case/referenda but a majority of my decision was on the impact part. Don't think i even explained the process :/ just explained in general terms that referendums were the only way that the constitution could actually be altered and some referendums (ie. indigenous referenda) resulted in the shift of law-making power and what was meant by the changing the division of law-making power.

[lloyd18]

wait, so the question was using one referendum and one high court case, analyse the impact of referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers
the question is not asking us to analyse the referendum process or h.c interpretation... it is asking us to analyse the impact of the referendum process on the division of law making power in the cases,  therefore youre analyzing the cases in respect to the referendum not stating the strengths and weaknesses of a referendum.... even in respect to the cases, all you have to say is how it chnages division of law making powers in respect to the cases..
Idk, i read that question very carefull and technically that is what it's asking

thanks for that yes i agree completely, so for example like i said before an anlysis for a referendum like the 1967 aborigines one would be like it shifted the division of law-making powers form the state to comm parliaments by allowing them to move into an area of residual power and legislate in regards to aboriginal people.
For high court for brislans case- the high court interpreted the phrase 'other like services' to include broadcasting to wireless sets thus allowing the com parliament to be able to legislate in regards to postal, telegraphic, telephonic and other like services including boradcasting wireless sets, thus shifting the division of law making powers to the comm parliment by allowing them to enter into an area of law that was residual.
impact was a shift of division of law making powers form states to commonwealth parliament.

[Outclass]

wait, so the question was using one referendum and one high court case, analyse the impact of referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers
the question is not asking us to analyse the referendum process or h.c interpretation... it is asking us to analyse the impact of the referendum process on the division of law making power in the cases,  therefore youre analyzing the cases in respect to the referendum not stating the strengths and weaknesses of a referendum.... even in respect to the cases, all you have to say is how it chnages division of law making powers in respect to the cases..
Idk, i read that question very carefull and technically that is what it's asking

I read the question about 5 times in the exam and that's what I thought also

[M_BONG]

wait, so the question was using one referendum and one high court case, analyse the impact of referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers
the question is not asking us to analyse the referendum process or h.c interpretation... it is asking us to analyse the impact of the referendum process on the division of law making power in the cases,  therefore youre analyzing the cases in respect to the referendum not stating the strengths and weaknesses of a referendum.... even in respect to the cases, all you have to say is how it chnages division of law making powers in respect to the cases..
Idk, i read that question very carefull and technically that is what it's asking

This is the way I read it.
Using one HC case and one referendum, analyse how these cases impacted the division of power.

But then I was persuaded by Lloyd's statement that you needed to slip in strengths and weaknesses there somewhere.
HOWEVER look at how easy you could have misread the question:
ORIGINAL QUESTION: "using one referendum and one higgh court case, analyse the impact of referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers"
ADD ONE WORD INTO QUESTION "using one referendum and one higgh court case, analyse the impact of THE referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers"

One word is the difference between getting 2-3 marks and 8 marks. I think this is a very subtle trick question?

[lloyd18]

I read the question about 5 times in the exam and that's what I thought also

yeh i misread, however my response to esther is the answer for both

[M_BONG]

thanks for that yes i agree completely, so for example like i said before an anlysis for a referendum like the 1967 aborigines one would be like it shifted the division of law-making powers form the state to comm parliaments by allowing them to move into an area of residual power and legislate in regards to aboriginal people.
For high court for brislans case- the high court interpreted the phrase 'other like services' to include broadcasting to wireless sets thus allowing the com parliament to be able to legislate in regards to postal, telegraphic, telephonic and other like services including boradcasting wireless sets, thus shifting the division of law making powers to the comm parliment by allowing them to enter into an area of law that was residual.
impact was a shift of division of law making powers form states to commonwealth parliament.

So are you now saying strengths and weaknesses of the oveall processes are not needed? Instead, you only need to analyse the individual cases?

[lloyd18]

This is the way I read it.
Using one HC case and one referendum, analyse how these cases impacted the division of power.

But then I was persuaded by Lloyd's statement that you needed to slip in strengths and weaknesses there somewhere.
HOWEVER look at how easy you could have misread the question:
ORIGINAL QUESTION: "using one referendum and one higgh court case, analyse the impact of referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers"
ADD ONE WORD INTO QUESTION "using one referendum and one higgh court case, analyse the impact of THE referendum and the high courts interpretation of the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers"

One word is the difference between getting 2-3 marks and 8 marks. I think this is a very subtle trick question?

yeh theres a subtle trick

[lloyd18]

So are you now saying strengths and weaknesses of the oveall processes are not needed? Instead, you only need to analyse the individual cases?

yep, i did the exam today just so i had the answers and i provided both strengths and weaknesses and the impact of the cases as well as description of both high court interpretation and referendums, that will get you the 8 but you dont need the strengths and weaknesses but they wont hurt.

[EstherR]

thanks for that yes i agree completely, so for example like i said before an anlysis for a referendum like the 1967 aborigines one would be like it shifted the division of law-making powers form the state to comm parliaments by allowing them to move into an area of residual power and legislate in regards to aboriginal people.
For high court for brislans case- the high court interpreted the phrase 'other like services' to include broadcasting to wireless sets thus allowing the com parliament to be able to legislate in regards to postal, telegraphic, telephonic and other like services including boradcasting wireless sets, thus shifting the division of law making powers to the comm parliment by allowing them to enter into an area of law that was residual.
impact was a shift of division of law making powers form states to commonwealth parliament.

you had me worried! haha
yeah it was quite tricky, but that was my initial response, i used the franklin dam case and the 1967 referendum and stated the shift in power that occurred through both process, that was how i analysed them and stated the outcome of the cases and the impact they had in shift of power
that is an effect of referendum and h.c interpretation when they are analysed in respect of shifting in law making power
it was a big question so lets hope i was right!

[lloyd18]

you had me worried! haha
yeah it was quite tricky, but that was my initial response, i used the franklin dam case and the 1967 referendum and stated the shift in power that occurred through both process, that was how i analysed them and stated the outcome of the cases and the impact they had in shift of power
that is an effect of referendum and h.c interpretation when they are analysed in respect of shifting in law making power
it was a big question so lets hope i was right!

sorry about that, thanks for picking it up and Good luck

[EstherR]

sorry about that, thanks for picking it up and Good luck

Haha, just a worried student, it's all good! And thanks, hopefully I can achieve a similar score to yours

[hola123]

sorry about that, thanks for picking it up and Good luck

"Using one referendum and one high court case, analyse the impact of referendum and the high courts interpretation on the commonwealth constitution on the division of law making powers."

I thought this question meant "analyse the impact of referendums and HC interpretation on the division of powers, using cases to explain your point."

So I said the referendums don't always impact division of powers because (1) there have been few successful ones and (2) the outcome of some referendums don't always change the balance of power e.g. the referendum about the judge's retirement age. Then I said that referendums can also change the division of power using the Indigenous Australians referendum and its facts to explain how the Commonwealth gained power etc. I did the same for HC, as in the interpretations can cause legislation to be declared invalid e.g. Roach case and can also allow implied rights to rise e.g. right to freedom of political communication. Again, I then explained the First Uniform Tax case to demonstrate how the interpretation caused a shift in the balance of power

Do you think this is right... or have I gone way way way offtrack in trying to analyse the impact of referendums/HC interpretation. Hated this question on the exam! I was so confused how two cases could equal 8 marks.