Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 04:49:38 am

Author Topic: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread  (Read 596298 times)  Share 

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

nacho

  • The Thought Police
  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2602
  • Respect: +418
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #510 on: May 05, 2011, 03:47:36 pm »
0
fewf sure am glad i didnt spend time on it
i spent 1.5 hours rote learning the stuff, for some reason i already knew the constitution (except s.99 ans s.5 1(v))
but yea does someone mind uplaoding their legal sacs/prac sacs?
Is legal generally straigthforward like the sacs ive been getting, and you just have to work on answering the question properly?
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

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #511 on: May 05, 2011, 09:58:57 pm »
0
Look at page 33 of this thread for practice SACs. Yeh, that's essentially it; knowing how to answer the question to obtain full marks. That comes with practice, and exposing yourself to as many different types of questions as possible - so when you do SACs and eventually the exam, there won't be any questions which you haven't already seen before. Legal Studies doesn't really throw up any real surprises, if you know the content back-to-front in my opinion.

Darren

  • Guest
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #512 on: May 12, 2011, 04:55:14 pm »
0
Are retirement funds/ pension laws a residual power?

waldo777

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Respect: +9
  • School: Koonung Secondary College
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #513 on: May 12, 2011, 09:20:49 pm »
0
Are retirement funds/ pension laws a residual power?

They are definitely not residual. Probably exclusive but possibly concurrent (despite being funded and regulated by the Commonwealth).
2010: Business Management [46]
2011: English [40] | Accounting [47] | Legal Studies [46]  |  Methods [31] |  UMEP Accounting [5.5]
ATAR [98.40]
2012: Commerce at UoM (Economics and Accounting)

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #514 on: May 21, 2011, 10:42:31 pm »
0
Where's everyone up to? We started Unit 4 on Thursday. My AOS 3 SAC is about 2 weeks away!

Liuy

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 528
  • Respect: +5
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #515 on: May 21, 2011, 10:47:52 pm »
0
Wow EPL you guys are at least a week and a half ahead of us !
'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

whitecatdisguised

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #516 on: May 26, 2011, 08:15:12 pm »
0
So apparently in the study design we must know the relationship between parliament and the courts as law-makers. Does anyone know what the differences between the parliament and the courts are as law-makers?

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #517 on: May 26, 2011, 10:01:36 pm »
0
Does anyone know what the differences between the parliament and the courts are as law-makers?

Some include:

- Parliament can investigate a whole area of law and make a comprehensive set of laws. Whereas, the courts cannot investigate a whole area of law; they can only make decisions based on what is brought before them.
- Parliament can make laws "in futuro". Courts make laws "ex post facto".
- Parliament provides for an area for debate. Judges make decisions based on the information presented to them in court and no public debate takes place.
- Parliament is democratically-elected. Whereas judges are appointed by the Governor on advice from the government; hence not democratically-elected.

Tobias Funke

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • Respect: +1
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #518 on: May 29, 2011, 09:21:52 am »
0
How can one best structure a legal studies essay? It was the question i stuffed up the most in my Legal SAC the other week, and I have to do two in the sac this week. fun.
sometimes I feel as if I'd be more enriched in life if I bought an RV and started cooking meth

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #519 on: May 29, 2011, 03:54:18 pm »
0
How can one best structure a legal studies essay? It was the question i stuffed up the most in my Legal SAC the other week, and I have to do two in the sac this week. fun.

Depends on the question. Generally, the "essay" questions tend to be worth 10 marks. In AOS 3, Unit 3; the main 10-mark question relates to the strengths and weaknesses of the courts as law-makers. The way I would structure my answer is; have one "introduction" paragraph about the courts as law-makers. For example, the courts are created by Parliament, who pass Acts which creates the courts and also sets out their jurisdiction (i.e. The Supreme Court Act created the Victorian Supreme Court.). Some strengths include; then list 4 strengths of the courts as law-makers. Then say "However, some weaknesses include..." and list 4 corresponding weaknesses - assuming it's a "Critically evaluate" question. After the "introduction" paragraph; have 4 separate paragraphs. One strength and corresponding weakness per paragraph; as outlined previously. That should be enough to get full marks - in my opinion.

burbs

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1800
  • Fuck da police - Aristotle
  • Respect: +227
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #520 on: May 30, 2011, 10:53:27 pm »
0
AOS 3 - Role of courts.

There are about 1000000000 case studies, dunno what I need examples for. Is this enough:

Negligence (Donoghue v. Stevenson and Grant v. Aus Knitting Mills)
Mabo->Wik->Native title act
Deing v. Tarola
Mansfield v. Kenny
Trigwell

eeps

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2533
  • Respect: +343
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #521 on: May 30, 2011, 11:08:55 pm »
0
Yes.

hotdog169

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 27
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #522 on: June 20, 2011, 11:50:40 pm »
0
how would i answer this question ?
How does a judge interpret statutues? thers not really a process so is it talking about the intrinsic and extrinsic materials ?
also how would i answer this, should the courts be making laws on controversial issues?

Liuy

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 528
  • Respect: +5
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #523 on: June 21, 2011, 02:06:46 am »
0
1. You should briefly discuss Statutory Interpretation, i.e. involving a judge examining and interpreting the meaning of words contained in a relevant stature before applying these to the facts of the case.
Then go on to talk about methods used to carry out this statutory interpretation, i.e. intrinsic materials (punctuation, heading etc) and extrinsic materials (Hansard, Parliamentary Committee Reports etc.)

2. This requires a bit of discussion on the strengths and weaknesses of Courts making laws on Controversial issues. You could say Judges are not subject to political pressures when making decisions, so can objectively assess need for change in law.
On the other hand, Courts are not an elected body so certain groups may be affected by controversial court-made law and they have no recourse for democratic processes to challenge the decision.

:)
'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

billius1

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #524 on: June 24, 2011, 11:49:42 am »
0
how would i answer this question ?
How does a judge interpret statutues? thers not really a process so is it talking about the intrinsic and extrinsic materials ?
also how would i answer this, should the courts be making laws on controversial issues?

for the second question (on the courts and controversy), you need to consider a few things, because, without actually saying it in the question, it is a critical evaluation of the courts as law makers - however it takes it a step further and specifies exactly which area of court made law it wants you to evaluate (the ability of the judiciary to make laws in controversial areas).

-Because they don't rely on votes, judge's aren't at the mercy of the public, as (unlike Parliament) they cannot be held accountable for their actions. If a judge sets a precedent that goes against the views and values of the wider community, there is little that can be done, particularly if a higher court (supreme or even High court) does this. The only way a bad court-made law can be overturned is by Parliament (a feature of their relationship, and a strength of Parliament as a lawmaking body). As a result of this absence of accountability, it's argued that the courts should not make laws in controversial areas, as there is no way to check against bias or poor decisions.
However, this fact that judge's are appointed and not elected also means that the judiciary can make laws that are likely to be in the best interest of society - free from political pressures and influences. Because Parliament relies on the public's vote, they may withhold lawmaking in areas of controversy to avoid alienating a particular (usually powerful) group of voters. Without this issue, the courts can effectively make laws in controversial areas.

-Another point is that the judiciary is not democratic, as it is often only a single judge who sets precedent. In areas of controversy (such as abortion) , it's difficult for a single person to make impartial laws, setting aside their own views on the matter. Because no official scrutiny can be applied on the judiciary, it is likely that their personal biases will disrupt their ability to effectively make laws in controversial areas.

Also, the primary function of the courts is to settle the dispute presented in the case before them - lawmaking is their secondary function. This means that a court may set a precedent (and thus, make a law) that is in the best interest of the case at hand, but may be inadequate as a general law. Because no 2 cases are identical, the judge's ratio decidendi must be focused on the case at hand, but also general enough to be applied to wider cases. this is difficult to achieve, and rarely done properly - court-made law tends to be tilted in the best interest of the particular case (that is, to be applied to the ad hoc case, rather than as a general rule for the wider community). In controversial areas, this means that a law may be made that is appropriate to one case, but inappropriate to others, and so the law itself would be ineffective in practice.


hope this helps, sorry it's so long, i haven't written about legal in a few months so reword it in your own way, but those are the main few points (you don't need to talk about all of them - depends on how many marks the q. is worth)