Exam Question scenario question.

[danielvang]

For the 2010 Legal Studies Exam
Question 4 stated a newspaper article that contained errors.

I'll write the passage up here:

Today is the start of Brendan's civil action against Henry in the Supreme Court. Brendan is claiming $3000 for breach of contract. Henry, the plaintiff, is strongly denying any liability. In court, Brendan must prove his case beyond reasonable doubt to the judge.
Identify two errors in the extract above and the correct definition process or procedure.

So one of my answers  I wrote down is that VCAT would be a suitable option as it hears cases <$10,000. However in the Examiners report it did not say anything to do with tribunals? Would this still be considered correct? or would I have to just use the Magistrates' court as suggested. Thanks in advance 

[Übermensch]

First of all, this case would not be conducted in the Supreme Court but rather the Magistrates' Court, as its jurisdiction facilitates for civil claims under $100,000. However, claims under $10,000 in the Magistrates' ($3,000 for this case) will be automatically referred to arbitration in an attempt to settle the dispute. So ultimately don't mention VCAT (considered incorrect yes) as the Magistrates' Court can hold arbitration sessions too.

[danielvang]

Ahh thank you 

[meganrobyn]

Sounds like you're mixing up your methods of dispute resolution with your venues/avenues for dispute resolution. VCAT is an avenue; arbitration is a method. Just because something might be resolved using arbitration, doesn't mean it will automatically happen in VCAT, even though VCAT *does* use arbitration. The matter needs to be within the jurisdiction of a VCAT list (most breach of contract disputes are *not*), and the complainant needs to file their complaint with VCAT in the first place.

Mixing up methods and avenues is a really common error, so it's good to watch out for.