VCAT civil claims list jurisdiction

[Duck]

Neap 2010 says it's only under $10000 but my book says small claims (90% of claims) are for less than $10000 but there can be claims over that. If it's only worth one mark what would you write? Personally I think I would ignore the 10000 and just say disputes between consumers and traders arising under the... acts. Opinions?

[eeps]

The Claims List involves disputes between consumers and traders in relation to small claims. The dispute can be for any amount, unless it is a small claim relating to a contract other than insurance, in which case the claim must not exceed $10,000. Personal injuries claims also cannot exceed $10,000.

I think you'd best go with the solutions (NEAP). Just saying "disputes between consumers and traders..." I think would be a bit vague, you want to show the marker that you fully understand what the Claims List is, even if it is only worth 1 mark. I'd talk about the limit of $10,000 just to be sure of getting the mark.

That's just me though.

[Duck]

The Claims List involves disputes between consumers and traders in relation to small claims

My interpretation of the textbook is that this is wrong. The Civil Claims list hears both small claims of up to 10,000 and other claims exceeding 10,000.

[Spreadbury]

perhaps exceeding $10,000 is only in exceptional cases? a majority of the claims would involve up to $10,000 but not more. i'd say that it resolves small claims between consumers and traders in matters relating to claims of payment of money or completion of work of a value not exceeding $10,000.

I don't think they would mark you TOO harshly for a one mark question anyway.

[chrisjb]

I remember my teacher saying that it used to be only claims under 10K- which earnt it the name 'small claims list', but it had been broadened to be any amount now. You're probably right in that most of them are still under the 10K mark... a sort of hangover effect, whereby although they're able to hear bigger claims the generaly don't deal with them- like how although the county court can hear unlimited claims, it still will generaly will only hear them for under 200K.

I might be remembering wrong though. I'd go with the textbook... or you could ring up pretending to want to take someone to their list for +10,000 and see what they say... Going with the textbook is probably easier though.

[chrisjb]

Also, while we're all answering questions, I don't understand who or what makes up the executive arm of the legal system.

I thought it was theoreticly the queens representative alone, however she acted on the behalf of the government who were part of the legislature... but the more i read it appears i was wrong and the government as well as the queen's rep make up the executive in theory as well as in practice.

basicly my question is: is the government officialy part of the executive arm of the system? Or do they simply dictate to the queen's rep what they should do, and the crown theoreticly forms the entirity of the executive arm?

surprisingly, i looked over that again and couldn't find an easier way to word my question

[Spreadbury]

my textbook states that the executive power is exercised by the governor-general on the advice of the government, and therefore is largely exercised by the government. for simplicity's sake, I would say that the government is included in the executive division of power. as with duck's question, I don't think they would look too deeply into it, because as long as you state that it's exercised by the governor-general on the advice of the government, you've covered who the power is wielded by.

hmm, just now thought about it, and i suppose that the government can't officially be in the executive body of power, since the entire purpose of the separation of powers is to keep the three divisions seperate. Government's part of the legislative, and if they were officially included then the separation of power isn't doing its job

but don't go too deeply into it. I don't think it would be a major concern on the exam, and if so, just show them that you do understand the material.

[eOkee]

my textbook states that the executive power is exercised by the governor-general on the advice of the government, and therefore is largely exercised by the government. for simplicity's sake, I would say that the government is included in the executive division of power. as with duck's question, I don't think they would look too deeply into it, because as long as you state that it's exercised by the governor-general on the advice of the government, you've covered who the power is wielded by.

hmm, just now thought about it, and i suppose that the government can't officially be in the executive body of power, since the entire purpose of the separation of powers is to keep the three divisions seperate. Government's part of the legislative, and if they were officially included then the separation of power isn't doing its job

but don't go too deeply into it. I don't think it would be a major concern on the exam, and if so, just show them that you do understand the material.

Well thats the point. Government is part of both the Legislative and Executive arm of the Legal and Political system. Its very specific in textbooks and it says "Under the constitution the exective power is placed in the hands of the executive (Governor-General) but in practice it is carried out by the government."

so yes, chrisjb, in theory the government is not part of the executive arm. And I would be aware of the comparison between the separation of powers Australia and the US, if you can include that in your answer it might impress the assessor!