Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 07:44:47 am

Author Topic: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread  (Read 596320 times)  Share 

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #450 on: March 30, 2011, 10:53:43 pm »
0
I have a question of my own...

"Describe three ways in which the Commonwealth parliament's law-making ability is restricted by the Constitution." (6 marks) This question was on my practice SAC; I got 4 out of 6 marks for this question. I said that the Commonwealth parliament is restricted in that:

- It's restricted by specific prohibitions. For example it can't make laws that strict free trade among states (s. 92)
- It cannot make laws in areas of residual powers. For example, it can't make laws in areas of crime and public transport
- It cannot make laws that infringe on individual's rights such as the freedom of movement

I'm unclear as to how I lost the 2 marks; according to my teacher I contradicted myself with the first and third points. =\ Can someone give an alternative answer or suggestions on how to improve the answer? Cheers.

nacho

  • The Thought Police
  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2602
  • Respect: +418
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #451 on: March 30, 2011, 10:59:41 pm »
0
I have a question of my own...

"Describe three ways in which the Commonwealth parliament's law-making ability is restricted by the Constitution." (6 marks) This question was on my practice SAC; I got 4 out of 6 marks for this question. I said that the Commonwealth parliament is restricted in that:

- It's restricted by specific prohibitions. For example it can't make laws that strict free trade among states (s. 92)
- It cannot make laws in areas of residual powers. For example, it can't make laws in areas of crime and public transport
- It cannot make laws that infringe on individual's rights such as the freedom of movement

I'm unclear as to how I lost the 2 marks; according to my teacher I contradicted myself with the first and third points. =\ Can someone give an alternative answer or suggestions on how to improve the answer? Cheers.
Interesting..the first and third do not even relate lol, let alone contradict.
OFFICIAL FORUM RULE #1:
TrueTears is my role model so find your own

2012: BCom/BSc @ Monash
[Majors: Finance, Actuarial Studies, Mathematical Statistics]
[Minors: Psychology/ Statistics]

"Baby, it's only micro when it's soft".
-Bill Gates

Upvote me

izzykose

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 146
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #452 on: March 30, 2011, 11:17:46 pm »
0
I can only think of your first two to be honest. It would be much easier to argue that question for states. Because of Concurrent powers and section 109, specific restrictions 115 coining money and exclusive powers of the commonwealth either by nature, listed in 52 or prohibited.. or even that through allowing conditional grants the constitution even allows influence in areas of residual power.

But for yours! I find that such an obscure question, the first and second are clear, the third is not.. i would not even think of that example.. Maybe through allowing for High court interpretation, the constitution could potentially allow for the restriction or lessening of the commonwealth parliaments legislative powers in the future.. through the interpretation. <<< Could that be used?

Anyways.. hope this helped
2011:

Psychology [45], Legal Studies [42], English [43], History Revolutions [34], International Studies [33 :(]

2011 ATAR- 93.80

gs

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 119
  • Respect: +5
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #453 on: April 01, 2011, 10:48:02 pm »
0
How may the Commonwealth influence the states to hand over residual power? Use a case to demonstrate.
I'm thinking of talking about the referral of powers and using the Road's Case.

Done a little but not sure how to correctly put it together. Thoughts?
Bachelor of Laws / Bachelor of Business
'VU Achievement Scholarship' recipient

gs

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 119
  • Respect: +5
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #454 on: April 01, 2011, 10:56:30 pm »
0
Bit tired too doesn't help..
Bachelor of Laws / Bachelor of Business
'VU Achievement Scholarship' recipient

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #455 on: April 01, 2011, 10:58:45 pm »
0
In relation to the referral of powers, say something like; The referral of powers is where state parliaments pass an Act which refers their legislative powers on a particular topic to the Commonwealth, they all have to agree; an example of this would be the Road's Case (1926). Then, outline briefly the facts of the case and its' impact on the law-making powers of the Commonwealth. So in essence, it confirmed the Commonwealth's power to provide tied financial grants to the states, it dramatically increased the authority of the parliament to determine on which projects the states spent money, for example, education, hospitals etc. A modern-day example would be Eastlink, the Commonwealth provided funding to the Victorian government with the condition that it be a toll-free freeway.

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #456 on: April 02, 2011, 09:07:24 pm »
0
Question...

The Marital Status Act 2009 has just been passed by the Victorian Parliament. How could Section 109 of the Constitution affect this law if it were challenged in the courts? (2 marks)

I'm confused as to how to answer the question. Section 109 relates to inconsistencies in areas of concurrent powers, where the Federal law will override the State law... I'm not sure how that relates to the question though.

Any help would be appreciated!

andy456

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 951
  • Respect: +12
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #457 on: April 02, 2011, 09:11:05 pm »
0
I believe marriage is a concurrent power. If it were challenged in the courts it would probably because it was inconsistent with a federal law. So the question wants you to basically explain S109 with that act as an example. So the federal law would stand only in the area of inconsistency; that is the state law would not be abrogated entirely.
VCE 2010: Eng 42 | Legal 49 | Chem 37 | MM 34 | Indo SL 33 |
ATAR: 97.45
 
2011: Bachelor of Arts Monash University
2012: Bachelor of Commerce?? Please!!

Hellhole

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 140
  • Respect: +1
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #458 on: April 02, 2011, 09:23:45 pm »
0
Question...

The Marital Status Act 2009 has just been passed by the Victorian Parliament. How could Section 109 of the Constitution affect this law if it were challenged in the courts? (2 marks)

I'm confused as to how to answer the question. Section 109 relates to inconsistencies in areas of concurrent powers, where the Federal law will override the State law... I'm not sure how that relates to the question though.

Any help would be appreciated!

Marriage is a concurrent power. If there are any inconsistancies between the state and Commonwealth acts, it could be taken to court under section 109 of the Commonwealth Constitution. S109 basically says that, where there are inconsistancies, the Commonwealth legislation is superior to the state legislation and inconsistant sections under the state act could be deemed invalid or void.

gs

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 119
  • Respect: +5
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #459 on: April 04, 2011, 05:36:39 pm »
0
Cheers EPL. Much appreciated.
Bachelor of Laws / Bachelor of Business
'VU Achievement Scholarship' recipient

Liuy

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 528
  • Respect: +5
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #460 on: April 10, 2011, 03:46:00 pm »
0
Question.

When referring to a specific section such as S116- protecting freedom of religion, is it necessary to include an example of the restriction as well as elaborating that it prevents Parliament from legislation with respect to religion?

 Cheers
'10: Chinese SLA [38]
'11: Legal Studies [50] | English [44] | Physical Education [41] | Psychology [31] + Methods
ATAR:97.85

'12: Monash University - Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Laws

Hellhole

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 140
  • Respect: +1
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #461 on: April 10, 2011, 04:33:23 pm »
0
I'm not sure what you mean by an example of the restriction.

There are a few things that S116 entails, and it's not just preventing Parliament from legislation with respect to religion. It also includes Parliament being secular, members of Parliament not having to specify their religion/doing some religious test to be accepted as a candidate in election and also that the People are able to freely exercise their right to practice whatever religion they please.

Liuy

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 528
  • Respect: +5
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #462 on: April 10, 2011, 04:48:06 pm »
0
By example, I mean a real life application of the restriction, so for S116 an example  may be that Parliament cannot legislate in order to make Catholicism as the national religion.

Would I have to include things like that?
'10: Chinese SLA [38]
'11: Legal Studies [50] | English [44] | Physical Education [41] | Psychology [31] + Methods
ATAR:97.85

'12: Monash University - Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Laws

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #463 on: April 10, 2011, 05:06:22 pm »
0
By example, I mean a real life application of the restriction, so for S116 an example  may be that Parliament cannot legislate in order to make Catholicism as the national religion.

Would I have to include things like that?

No, I wouldn't think you'd need to.

Zafaraaaa

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 443
  • Respect: +7
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #464 on: April 10, 2011, 06:03:50 pm »
0
Just a quick question:
"The Commonwealth constitution protects democratic and human rights for all Australians. Compare this approach to one of the following countries: United Kingdom, the United States of America, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa.   (8 marks)

[I'd like to know what specific points we should include in these sorts of questions to get full marks? and when comparing, do we mention similarites and differences?? and also, with this sort of question, do we need to include our own evaluation or state our point of view on which approach is better? ]

thanks in advance :)
"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle" -Plato