Exam post mortem 2016

[Alter]

Hi Alter,
I was just wondering if you'd be able to answer a couple questions I have regarding the exam?
I was just curious as to what would've been desirable for 6 marks in regard to an evaluation of implied rights?
Also, for 4 marks, what would you have recommended writing for the purposes of civil and criminal pre-trial procedures?
Cheers!! Thank you

I'm not sure where any copies of the exam are, sorry. When one gets uploaded, I might be able to help you out.

[HarryCondon5]

I'm not where any copies of the exam are, sorry. When one gets uploaded, I might be able to help you out.

Thanks mate, too easy

[Olivia Shamoon]

What did you guys write for the 10 mark question?

I also stuffed up on the referendum question 

[Izzy1]

For the 10 mark question- Would five strengths and four weaknesses be enough if they were well explained?

[upandgo]

What did you guys write for the 10 mark question?

I also stuffed up on the referendum question 

for the 10 mark i discussed how the strengths of the adversary system + precedent (party control and avoiding precedent) can aid a judge in delivering an effective resolution, but the weaknesses of adversary + precedent (judge unable to exercise expertise, and being unable to avoid precedent) impedes the judges ability to make effective resolutions to the parties  wby?

also for that question regarding section 109, what did everyone mention for the 'how can a victorian law be in conflict with a federal law' bit? is it acceptable to respond that the OCPC may have been under pressure when drafting victorian legislation and not realise it was in conflict with a federal law?

[Thunderylife]

I messed up so much for jury in civil vs court. I said there is no juries in civil, forgot there was 6 but other than that it was pretty good. Even the 10 marker

[SexGodDosia]

What did you guys write for the 10 mark question?

I also stuffed up on the referendum question 

I did 2 strengths/ weaknesses of ROP/ ROJ vs Inquisitorial, allowed for me to show benefits and negatives and how it doesnt/ does achieve effective legal system etc
2 strength/ weakness of precedent as well as explaining Binding/persuasive precedent how it helps etc
1 reform to the adversary system that would improve effectiveness

[Thunderylife]

What did you guys write for the 10 mark question?

I also stuffed up on the referendum question 

I spoke about Adversary Systems , strength and weakness of Judges role and how that can be overcome  and how it is overcomed. Then spoke about Doctrine of precedent , strengths and weakness and then spoke about RODD.

[Glasses]

All I wanna know is why the hell someone would think high-heels are a weapon? Poor Sam (not that I can work out the gender of Sam).

[HopefulLawStudent]

High Heels are a weapon of mass destruction. They've been killing my feet all night.

[Thunderylife]

The question about role of commonwealth parliament. Did you guys speak about the powers or effectiveness of parliament as a law-maker?

[upandgo]

The question about role of commonwealth parliament. Did you guys speak about the powers or effectiveness of parliament as a law-maker?

i talked about the legislative role performed by the parliament (the role of the upper house, lower house and gov. general) but im probably wrong lol

[Samm1]

What did you guys write for the 10 mark question?

I also stuffed up on the referendum question 

I said how the precedent was great for resolving disputes as following decisions you know what to expect, but also how that'd be a negative if a lower court disagrees then more strengths and weaknesses. Then how Judges role is limited in Adversary, then some more strength and weaknesses of that.

[Samm1]

i talked about the legislative role performed by the parliament (the role of the upper house, lower house and gov. general) but im probably wrong lol

I didn't know what to write on that question so i talked about the 3 reading stages and how that creates a law, put some strengths and weaknesses such as party biased. Hopefully that was right.

[Glasses]

Now I'm a bit worried because what I did was quite different..
Regarding the law-making role of Parliament, I discussed strengths and weaknesses relating to Parliament in performing this role. So:
- Strength = Law-making is parliament's main function, meaning it can designate most of its time to this task.
- Corresponding weakness = Parliament is not always sitting, thereby hindering its ability to fulfil this task.
- Strength = In fulfilling this role, Parliament reflects the views and values of the people.
- Weakness = This can hinder Parliament's ability to fulfil its role of law-making, because of political influence and fear of voter backlash from passing controversial, but necessary laws.

I also started off by saying how the Commonwealth Parliament is Australia's supreme law-making body.