VCE Stuff > VCE Legal Studies
Ratio Decidendi
jcc:
Seems like a rather odd activity to do for a SAC, but I'm guessing a 'clever' way of doing it might involve first stating the facts of the case, and then referencing a specific section of the Crimes Act and giving a perculiar interpretation to that section.
misskaraleah:
--- Quote from: silentgoldeneyes on May 28, 2008, 08:55:15 pm ---From memory I was told precedent only exists in civil law (although it seems logical that judges can set precedents in sentencing in crim cases) because a crime can only be committed against an existing law.
However, precedent can be set on appeal (Studded Belt Case)
But we haven't had to write a ratio. Just extract it from quotes from cases.
It's an odd one...
--- End quote ---
Yeah we used the studded belt case aswell, but really that is criminal law, because he committed an offence.
--- Quote from: clinton_09 on May 28, 2008, 04:26:02 pm ---first 10,000 word essay on human rights now making your own ratio decidendi, your legal teacher has some pretty interesting expectations
--- End quote ---
I'm starting to realise that too. :(
AppleThief:
I was under the impression that manslaughter can't have a ratio decidendi, because manslaughter is decided by a jury, who don't give reasons for their decisions...so it's not a very useful activity, and I wouldn't really know what to write...
costargh:
Take a look below.
--- Quote from: costargh on May 26, 2008, 07:11:53 pm ---Sorry, from memory ratio decidendi is the judge's "reason for the decision". Key word: judges
So if manslaughter is before a jury, which I thought was the case (its heard in the County Court yes?) then wouldnt the judge merely be presiding over the court but not actually making the decision? (thats the jurys job).
Only thing I can think of is if this case was being heard on appeal which would be in front of a judge/judges which would then allow for a ratio decidendi to occur
--- End quote ---
ninwa:
--- Quote from: silentgoldeneyes on May 28, 2008, 08:55:15 pm ---From memory I was told precedent only exists in civil law (although it seems logical that judges can set precedents in sentencing in crim cases) because a crime can only be committed against an existing law.
--- End quote ---
I'm pretty sure precedent exists in criminal cases as well, because not all crimes are as clear-cut as the relevant legislative guidelines
e.g. the issue of whether verbal abuse is sufficient provocation to lower the crime of murder to manslaughter is treated differently in different cases, so precedent is used here to apply the case whose circumstances are most similar to the case at hand
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version