VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[nm4065]

If a questions asks to explain "specific powers" using examples for 3 marks, when you explain concurrent powers do you also have to explain S109? Thanks!

[clarke54321]

If a questions asks to explain "specific powers" using examples for 3 marks, when you explain concurrent powers do you also have to explain S109? Thanks!

I would always include a discussion of S109 when explaining concurrent powers. However, I may not be correct. I just believe it adds more substance and kind of ensures examiners can't take marks off for a lack of detail.

[clarke54321]

Hey Everyone,

For this question:

'Problems associated with civil pre-trial procedures make it diffi cult for people to gain access to the law. These
problems have also contributed to the popularity of tribunals and alternative dispute resolution methods'

Discuss two problems affecting our system of civil pre-trial procedure which make it difficult for people to gain
access to the law. In your answer, indicate how tribunals and alternative methods of dispute resolution have
attempted to overcome these problems.


When it says 'discuss' two problems, is this an evaluative function? For this question, it doesn't feel like an evaluative function.

[Glasses]

Hey Everyone,

For this question:

'Problems associated with civil pre-trial procedures make it diffi cult for people to gain access to the law. These
problems have also contributed to the popularity of tribunals and alternative dispute resolution methods'

Discuss two problems affecting our system of civil pre-trial procedure which make it difficult for people to gain
access to the law. In your answer, indicate how tribunals and alternative methods of dispute resolution have
attempted to overcome these problems.


When it says 'discuss' two problems, is this an evaluative function? For this question, it doesn't feel like an evaluative function.

I would probably answer it like:
a) Non-evaluative discussion of the problems.
b) Evaluative discussion of how tribunals and ADR methods have attempted to overcome the problems.

[clarke54321]

I would probably answer it like:
a) Non-evaluative discussion of the problems.
b) Evaluative discussion of how tribunals and ADR methods have attempted to overcome the problems.

Great, thanks Glasses!

[reards]

In what other ways can the courts overcome parliament's limitations apart from statutory interpretation in regards to applying law to current day society?

[meganrobyn]

I would probably answer it like:
a) Non-evaluative discussion of the problems.
b) Evaluative discussion of how tribunals and ADR methods have attempted to overcome the problems.

Re b) -- But it only says "indicate how", not "discuss whether"...

[clarke54321]

Re b) -- But it only says "indicate how", not "discuss whether"...

So there's no need for any type of evaluation in this question?

[clarke54321]

In what other ways can the courts overcome parliament's limitations apart from statutory interpretation in regards to applying law to current day society?

-Courts can make laws at any stage (unlike parliament that is limited to sitting days). However, courts must wait for a novel and relevant case to come before the court.

-Judges are appointed rather than elected and so aren't subject to the same political pressures as parliamentary members. This provides a degree of flexibility in law making. However, some judges may choose to be conservative in their approach to law-making.

-Courts are able to 'fill in the gaps of parliament,' being able to make laws ex post facto (I think this is what you mentioned with statutory interpretation). However, this may not always be possible if a judge is bound by a binding precedent and cannot distinguish the facts of the two cases. In this sense, freedom is limited.

You may be able to find more ideas on the VCAA past Legal Studies exams. But I think these points would be quite substantial if you fleshed them out.

[Glasses]

Re b) -- But it only says "indicate how", not "discuss whether"...

I stand corrected haha

[HopefulLawStudent]

“The need for legal representation is a key beneficial element of the adversarial system of trial.”
a. Give one reason why you agree with this statement.
It may be beneficial because it theoretically ensures that both parties’ cases are presented to the best possible standard as legal representatives should be familiar with the legal system and its strict rules of evidence and procedure. In so doing, it enhances the fairness which is an element of the adversarial system of trial.

b. Give one reason why you disagree with this statement.
Accessibility is an element of the adversarial system of trial. The need for legal representation detracts from accessibility as not all individuals can afford costly legal representation, thereby diminishing the accessibility of the legal system.

1 mark each.

And

Outline the role of the Senate.

The role of the Senate is to act as a house of review, preventing radical legislation that may upset the existing social order from being passed easily. However, its ability to function as this house of review will often determine largely on whether the Government holds the majority in this house; if they hold the majority here, then ‘rubber stamping’ will occur and there will be less scrutiny of incoming bills from the House of Representatives.

Another role of the Senate is to act as the States’ house, protecting the interests of the states and precluding larger states from using their size for their own gain. This is achieved by having a fixed number of Senators that is not at all determined by the size of the state. Today, however, the ability of the Senate to act as the States’ House is largely diminished by the fact that Parliamentarians vote along party lines, in the interests of their parties instead of those of their states.

[2 marks]

Would those answers be sufficient? Is it too verbose and rambly? Please, could someone give me feedback? My teacher says I have a bit of a tendency to veer off into tangents and churn out a whole bunch of unnecessary info so I'm beginning to be really conscious about the succinctness of my answers.

[meganrobyn]

So there's no need for any type of evaluation in this question?

I'd have to check the Assessor's Report for that year to check her comments, but, based on the reading of it now, I probably wouldn't do any "both sides" evaluation, no. If I was in doubt, I might chuck in a few comments re the first part, because 'discuss' is more ambiguous.

[phurell]

What happens if there's a contradiction between common law and statute law? which one is able to override the other?

Thanks!

Also, in the study design what does it mean exactly by "The ability of judges and courts to make law" ?

[Glasses]

What happens if there's a contradiction between common law and statute law? which one is able to override the other?

Thanks!

Also, in the study design what does it mean exactly by "The ability of judges and courts to make law" ?

Hi there! Statute law will override common law, as Parliament is the supreme law-making body; however it is important to note that Parliament cannot override High Court interpretations of the Constitution - so make sure you don't get confused by this.

"The ability of judges and courts to make law" is basically how law can be created in the courts. I.e. Whilst the courts' primary function is to resolve disputes, they are also able to create law, to some extent. They do this in two key ways:
1) By deciding on a case where there is no relevant statute or common law to apply; i.e. so they have to 'make' the law for the new situation - a good example is the Donoghue v. Stevenson Case.
2) By bringing the words in an Act of Parliament 'to life' through statutory interpretation. I.e. By determining the meaning behind statute law and how it is understood.

Hope that helps!

[jacquic]

Hello...
Can someone pls help me on this question...off the 2014 exam
Discuss the extent to which the High Court can change the Commonwealth Constitution. (5 marks)
Thanks