VCE Stuff > VCE Legal Studies

Difficulties in gaining access to the law

<< < (6/9) > >>

brendan:
well that's what Gleeson argued. that courts do not make the law, and they ought not make the law. i would give you bonus points for questioning the assumptions. the question gives you room to disagree anyway. so you can disagree with the assumptions implicit in the statement.

It like the question: "You should stop beating your wife" Do you agree?

you can reply: "well i do not beat my wife in the first place, nor should i beat my wife"

PMD:
Whilst I definetely I agree with what brendan's saying about them developing/refining law rather than "making" it per se, I'd say it's best to use to word "making" in an exam. I'd do that simply because the study design and all textbooks refer to it as such, and you wouldn't really want to run the risk of jeopardizing some marks so as to be technically correct.

Anyway, as for the topic at hand, it'd probably be a good idea to learn two examples in a great amount of detail and then perhaps learn a few more in a short amount of detail, just so you can throw them in if they're relevant.

costargh:
Lol Brendan. How could you be a moderator for VCE legal studies site when you disagree with the entire course that they are teaching us. Basically all we  care about is fulfilling what is asked on the exam.

It is not our problem to question what they are teaching us. Maybe in Uni that is what you do but please for the sake of VCE legal students who are being assessed according to a particular study design, don't try and teach us anything that goes against the study design.

brendan:
LOL law is all about disagreement. If you want to see disagreement in action check out Al-kateb, and Perre v Apand.

anyway, the question you posed specifically allowed for disagreement. so i do not think that you would get marks taken off for criticizing the idea that judges "make law" or criticizing the idea that judges ought to make law.

if i had to say that they made law, then i would add the qualification that they must develop it gradually,

costargh:
The study design doesn't ask you to criticize whether or not judges make law. It is actually part of the study design that judges make law. You dont question it. I'm not arguing that in law you may question that but not in Legal Studies. You cannot do that. You can argue for the ways in which judges make law but you cannot say judges do not make law.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page