Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 09:36:54 am

Author Topic: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread  (Read 596334 times)  Share 

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

bodriagin

  • Guest
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #675 on: October 08, 2011, 10:21:56 pm »
0
So is jury use possible in judicial determination?

If I decided to take my civil dispute that was worth $80,000 straight to the Magistrates' Court, instead of going through VCAT, would this be judicial determination OR would it be court resolution?

What would the strengths and weaknesses of judicial determination be? Would it just be a comparison between VCAT and NORMAL court resolution (VCAT is less costly than court resolution) or would it have its own separate strengths and weaknesses (JD is cheaper than traditional court resolution but more expensive than ADR provided by VCAT - is it?)? My textbook definitely has no clear analysis of judicial determination.

The question I'm referring to is from the sample questions published by VCAA.

"Explain one strength and one weakness of judicial determination as a method of dispute resolution."





billius1

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #676 on: October 09, 2011, 01:00:20 am »
+3
So is jury use possible in judicial determination?

If I decided to take my civil dispute that was worth $80,000 straight to the Magistrates' Court, instead of going through VCAT, would this be judicial determination OR would it be court resolution?

What would the strengths and weaknesses of judicial determination be? Would it just be a comparison between VCAT and NORMAL court resolution (VCAT is less costly than court resolution) or would it have its own separate strengths and weaknesses (JD is cheaper than traditional court resolution but more expensive than ADR provided by VCAT - is it?)? My textbook definitely has no clear analysis of judicial determination.

The question I'm referring to is from the sample questions published by VCAA.

"Explain one strength and one weakness of judicial determination as a method of dispute resolution."






Yes to jury. JD refers to the court resolution process as a whole. Think of it as synonymous with court resolution

 If you're asked for an evaluation (or strength/weakness which is slightly easier to do) of JD only, like that VCAA question, then these strengths/weaknesses would be ones purely of the courts (which would of course include some of the adversary system ones). for example: strict rules of procedure ensure fairness as no party can hold greater weight than another during  the resolution process (you fluff it up to make it sound nicer); the strict rules of evidence ensure fairness by prohibiting evidence that might be flawed from influencing resolutions. Weaknesses you could talk about costs (used as an umbrella term for financial, time, emotional/psychological cost), no win/win resolution obtained and so animosity is likely to be created, rules of evidence mean some crucial evidence may not be brought to the fore.

if you look at a past textbook called Making and Breaking the Law (purple cover), they have a nice little table of this in the later chapters (it's light blue -to make looking a bit easier)  that summarizes strengths and weaknesses of court resolution (which you can rename JD), ADR, and tribunals. work off that for your advtg./disadvtg.s

also, just so you know, a civil case worth $80 000 would not be able to go to VCAT, you don't have a choice.

bodriagin

  • Guest
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #677 on: October 10, 2011, 01:17:19 am »
+1
Thank you so much. I love you.

nacho

  • The Thought Police
  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2602
  • Respect: +418
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #678 on: October 10, 2011, 01:27:43 pm »
0
question ; do we need to know what the 'residential tenancies list' is and its jurisdiction?
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

billius1

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #679 on: October 10, 2011, 04:37:13 pm »
0
Thank you so much. I love you.

hahahaaa no worries buddy. keep the questions coming ;)

billius1

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #680 on: October 10, 2011, 04:47:01 pm »
0
question ; do we need to know what the 'residential tenancies list' is and its jurisdiction?

no, I'm pretty sure that was discarded by VCAA (fortunately too! that was the one part of legal i actually hated). In the past when it's required they actually explicitly say it in the study design. They wouldn't actively take it out and still expect it to be known.
also, if they wanted jurisdictions of particular lists, they'd have to specify which, because there are very very very many!
so all this tells me no, you don't need to :)

Liuy

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 528
  • Respect: +5
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #681 on: October 10, 2011, 05:17:10 pm »
0
There is an added emphasis placed on the role and functioning of VCAT in the new study design, rather than recalling copious amounts of jurisdictions for each List/Division.
'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

nacho

  • The Thought Police
  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2602
  • Respect: +418
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #682 on: October 13, 2011, 03:30:49 pm »
+1
oh okay, yea i also emailed vcaa. they said:


Hi ****
 
Re: I wanted to know whether it is compulsory knowing all the lists under VCAT is required of the course? For example, under the civil lists there is the residential tenancy list....

- Unit 4 Area of study 1 requires students to know the ‘role of VCAT’ as well as the dispute resolution methods used by VCAT, the strengths and weaknesses of the methods and strengths and weaknesses of the way VCAT operates to resolve disputes.
 Of course, teachers may use the VCAT lists to explain the role and the way VCAT operates. However, the examination will not specifically ask a question about VCAT lists.

awesome
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

burbs

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1800
  • Fuck da police - Aristotle
  • Respect: +227
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #683 on: October 17, 2011, 06:04:39 pm »
0
Hello friends.

Evaluate my evaluation please :) Pretty much made this question up, let's say 10 marks. Will do a few more.


Quote
Compare the adversary system to the inquisitorial system and through this, evaluate the effectiveness of the adversarial system of trial.

The adversary system of trial is where parties aim to win a case in front of an impartial, independent arbiter, and is the system primarily used in Australia. The inquisitorial system is an alternative system of trial where the judge leads an inquiry on a case to ensure the truth emerges.

The adversarial and inquisitorial systems of trial differ in terms of the roles of the parties. In the adversarial system, there is ‘party control’ whereby parties investigate the proceedings and facts of a case and decide which facts are to be brought before the court. The inquisitorial system does not have this in place and instead parties respond to the court. Party control can be seen as a strength of the adversarial system as it allows them to feel in control of the situation and thus responsible for the outcome of the trial. It ensures a competitive spirit and a person who has an opportunity to fight for their case is more likely to be satisfied with the outcome. However, by having parties compete a sense of animosity can arise instead of peacefully resolving an issue. Moreover, the fact that parties decide which evidence is called up means that vital evidence may not be seen as it does not necessarily aid that party’s case, even though it is relevant to the trial.

Another difference between the two systems is the role of the judge. In the adversary system, the judge must act as an impartial umpire and cannot favour either side. They ensure the rules of evidence and procedure are followed. In the inquisitorial system the judge has a more active role as they lead the inquiry and decide what evidence is to be called up. The role of the judge in the adversary system ensures that a trial is fair as they enforce the rules of evidence and procedure. However, it does not utilise a judge’s expertise to their full extent as they must remain impartial throughout proceedings. The inquisitorial system makes better use of a judge’s skills and expertise but in doing so, potentially reduces the unbiased nature of a judge and may make a trial unfair.

In the adversary system, legal representation is necessary due to the complex and competitive nature. Whilst party control dictates that individuals can decide whether or not they have representation, the rules of evidence and procedure can be confusing. The need for legal representation ensures that the parties have the opportunity to present their best possible case. The inquisitorial system does not rely on legal representation and it may even be disallowed in some circumstances. Legal representation instead plays a more advisory role as the judge leads proceedings. A weakness of legal representation is that it is highly costly and the party that can afford better and more skilled lawyers may have an advantage.

The two systems also differ in terms of rules of evidence and procedure. The adversarial system has strict rules that promote consistency and that all parties are treated alike. Similarly, the reliance on oral evidence allows mechanism to decide on the sincerity of witnesses through cross-examination. However, this can lengthen the course of a case, especially as witnesses can lead to delays. The inquisitorial system relies on written evidence and has no formal standard of proof and less stringent rules of procedure. However, unlike in the adversarial system, this cannot be cross-examined. As such, whilst the adversarial system may have greater delays through this, evidence is analysed more thoroughly and party’s rights are better enforced through the rules.

The adversarial system of trial differs from the inquisitorial system in terms of the role of the judge and parties, the rules of evidence and procedure and whether or not legal representation is necessary. The former’s rigid rules of evidence, party control, unbiased nature of judges and necessity of legal representation may lead to lengthy and costly trials, but they ensure a fair hearing.

billius1

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #684 on: October 17, 2011, 06:48:09 pm »
+3
Hello friends.

Evaluate my evaluation please :) Pretty much made this question up, let's say 10 marks. Will do a few more.


Quote
Compare the adversary system to the inquisitorial system and through this, evaluate the effectiveness of the adversarial system of trial.

The adversary system of trial is where parties aim to win a case in front of an impartial, independent arbiter, and is the system primarily used in Australia. The inquisitorial system is an alternative system of trial where the judge leads an inquiry on a case to ensure the truth emerges.

The adversarial and inquisitorial systems of trial differ in terms of the roles of the parties. In the adversarial system, there is ‘party control’ whereby parties investigate the proceedings and facts of a case and decide which facts are to be brought before the court. The inquisitorial system does not have this in place and instead parties respond to the court. Party control can be seen as a strength of the adversarial system as it allows them to feel in control of the situation and thus responsible for the outcome of the trial. It ensures a competitive spirit and a person who has an opportunity to fight for their case is more likely to be satisfied with the outcome. However, by having parties compete a sense of animosity can arise instead of peacefully resolving an issue. Moreover, the fact that parties decide which evidence is called up means that vital evidence may not be seen as it does not necessarily aid that party’s case, even though it is relevant to the trial.

Another difference between the two systems is the role of the judge. In the adversary system, the judge must act as an impartial umpire and cannot favour either side. They ensure the rules of evidence and procedure are followed. In the inquisitorial system the judge has a more active role as they lead the inquiry and decide what evidence is to be called up. The role of the judge in the adversary system ensures that a trial is fair as they enforce the rules of evidence and procedure. However, it does not utilise a judge’s expertise to their full extent as they must remain impartial throughout proceedings. The inquisitorial system makes better use of a judge’s skills and expertise but in doing so, potentially reduces the unbiased nature of a judge and may make a trial unfair.

In the adversary system, legal representation is necessary due to the complex and competitive nature. Whilst party control dictates that individuals can decide whether or not they have representation, the rules of evidence and procedure can be confusing. The need for legal representation ensures that the parties have the opportunity to present their best possible case. The inquisitorial system does not rely on legal representation and it may even be disallowed in some circumstances. Legal representation instead plays a more advisory role as the judge leads proceedings. A weakness of legal representation is that it is highly costly and the party that can afford better and more skilled lawyers may have an advantage.

The two systems also differ in terms of rules of evidence and procedure. The adversarial system has strict rules that promote consistency and that all parties are treated alike. Similarly, the reliance on oral evidence allows mechanism to decide on the sincerity of witnesses through cross-examination. However, this can lengthen the course of a case, especially as witnesses can lead to delays. The inquisitorial system relies on written evidence and has no formal standard of proof and less stringent rules of procedure. However, unlike in the adversarial system, this cannot be cross-examined. As such, whilst the adversarial system may have greater delays through this, evidence is analysed more thoroughly and party’s rights are better enforced through the rules.

The adversarial system of trial differs from the inquisitorial system in terms of the role of the judge and parties, the rules of evidence and procedure and whether or not legal representation is necessary. The former’s rigid rules of evidence, party control, unbiased nature of judges and necessity of legal representation may lead to lengthy and costly trials, but they ensure a fair hearing.

I just skimmed, it's quite good.  I'll go through thoroughly now and comment on things as i go read it:

okay, just a small fyi type thing, the extended response on the exam will be a critical evaluation, not just an evaluation.

Im going to talk about paragraphs not including intro (para 1 is the first body paragraph)

in your first paragraph, you've kind of compared, then forgotten about the inquisitorial system. The question says "through this", and even if it didn't, a question regarding both the inquis. and advers. system comparison AND evaluation implies that it's looking for an evaluation through the comparison. Don't just state a difference/similarity, then evaluate the adversary system alone. Keep coming back to the comparison. for example, at the end of the first paragraph, add a little line to it like 'this contrasts with the inquis. system of trial, where animosity is less likely as the judge mainly conducts the trial, and all evidence is considered, ensuring a greater chance of justice being served".

don't forget you need to keep coming back to whether justice can be served easily or if it's hindered, because that's the purpose of a trial (even though it's not really spoken about in textbooks) always come back to serving justice.

also just a little thing, don't use "ensures a competitive spirit" as a strength. It's not a strength. it's just something that happens and can be taken as either good or bad depending on who you are. it's not worth mentioning there are other things you can say.

end the second paragraph with something going back to adversary evaluation, like "The inquisitorial system makes better use of a judge’s skills and expertise through his/her active role. In this respect the adversary system can be seen as disadvantageous, however this aspect of the inquis trial potentially reduces the unbiased nature of a judge and may make a trial unfair - a strength of the adversary trial where fairness is strictly enforced'

third para, again, don't just compare, then forget about what you compared and just say "a  weakness of legal rep...". you've just explained something- use that to evaluate, and don't forget you're evaluating the adversary system, not legal representation.  fixing this is as simple as saying, instead of "a weakness of legal rep...", maybe "this is a weakness of the advers system because legal rep is costly etc..."

your 4th paragraph only has one flaw i can see - after the word "cross-examination", you should include  some reference to the effectiveness, like "... -a great strength of the system". then "however, this strength is somewhat diminished as it can lengthen..."

you're conclusion is redundant. it is a waste. unlike english, you don't have to summarise what you said.  a much much better way to end is to focus on the evaluation side of it. a short 1-2 sentences after the first fraction of what you already have about them being different (just before you get into how - "..in terms of..") instead of the bit including and following "in terms of...", start a new sentence and make a conclusive statement about how "while the adversary system is flawed, and while these flaws are often strong points of the inquis system, the adversarial trial is still ultimately effective, as it's strengths overshadow its limitations"


i'd give it about a 7 or so. you're content is all there, you just need to reword things to answer the question more explicitly. and remember, any question where there's explain/define/list  AND evaluate, the main part of it is the evaluate.

burbs

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1800
  • Fuck da police - Aristotle
  • Respect: +227
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #685 on: October 17, 2011, 06:54:47 pm »
0
Brilliant, you are correct. Thanks!

nacho

  • The Thought Police
  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2602
  • Respect: +418
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #686 on: October 18, 2011, 09:00:10 pm »
0
What is the difference between overruling and reversing? I'm not quite sure of the difference, it seems a little ambiguous to me
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

burbs

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1800
  • Fuck da police - Aristotle
  • Respect: +227
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #687 on: October 18, 2011, 09:04:27 pm »
0
What is the difference between overruling and reversing? I'm not quite sure of the difference, it seems a little ambiguous to me

Reversing is with appeals and the DoP.

Liuy

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 528
  • Respect: +5
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #688 on: October 18, 2011, 09:07:38 pm »
0
Overruling is a judge deciding that a case has a different precedent than that set in another case at a lower court.
Reversing is the same, but the in SAME case, on appeal, is ruled by a superior court that a lower court wrongly decided 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

nacho

  • The Thought Police
  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Superstar
  • ******
  • Posts: 2602
  • Respect: +418
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #689 on: October 19, 2011, 12:17:08 am »
0
Discuss why parliament retains the power to abrogate or codify law made by courts. (4 marks)


also:

‘The only effective way to influence parliament is through the Victorian Law Reform Commission.’
a.   Do you agree? In your answer, evaluate how effective demonstrations are in influencing parliament to change the law. (4 marks)

^ what aspects of that question would you discuss in your answer? (just briefly if you could)

also:
Briefly, how do juries hepl achieve effective access to the legal system?
i cant see how they in anyway increase accessibility to the legal system..
« Last Edit: October 19, 2011, 12:58:14 am by nacho »
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