How did everyone find it?

[KristyDanielle]

Did you find it kind of hard? Or was it as easy as sinch for you?

[michak]

Thought is was pretty easy and straight forward
So surprised there was no comparison with another country again
Only question that really gave me triuble was the damages one and what to write for 4 marks

what about yourself?

[Pa007]

It wasn't easy and it wasn't hard. I think the problem with the legal exam this year was around ambiguities and personal interpretation.

[michak]

It wasn't easy and it wasn't hard. I think the problem with the legal exam this year was around ambiguities and personal interpretation.

What questions were ambigious and up for personal interpretation?

[Pa007]

It wasn't easy and it wasn't hard. I think the problem with the legal exam this year was around ambiguities and personal interpretation.

What questions were ambigious and up for personal interpretation?

I found the 1 question to be a little unclear as proclamation isn't a stage per say but a result of royal assent. The courts as a body that change law was a little odd. The damages question was a bit of a throw off considering it was 5 marks and the supreme court precedent question.

[michak]

It wasn't easy and it wasn't hard. I think the problem with the legal exam this year was around ambiguities and personal interpretation.

What questions were ambigious and up for personal interpretation?

I found the 1 question to be a little unclear as proclamation isn't a stage per say but a result of royal assent. The courts as a body that change law was a little odd. The damages question was a bit of a throw off considering it was 5 marks and the supreme court precedent question.

The first question was obiviously proclamation because it gave the date that royal assent was given
I agree with the damages one, had no idea what to write for 4 marks, kinda waffled a bit
The supreme court one was that courts on the same level don't have to follow their already exisiting precedents, they can disapprove of that precedent and create a new one even if they conflcit

How do you think you went though?

[Dejan]

First question was quite ambiguous

[michak]

First question was quite ambiguous

Guess a lot of people found it so
may i ask why you didn't think it was proclamation?

[Pa007]

It wasn't easy and it wasn't hard. I think the problem with the legal exam this year was around ambiguities and personal interpretation.

What questions were ambigious and up for personal interpretation?

I found the 1 question to be a little unclear as proclamation isn't a stage per say but a result of royal assent. The courts as a body that change law was a little odd. The damages question was a bit of a throw off considering it was 5 marks and the supreme court precedent question.

The first question was obiviously proclamation because it gave the date that royal assent was given
I agree with the damages one, had no idea what to write for 4 marks, kinda waffled a bit
The supreme court one was that courts on the same level don't have to follow their already exisiting precedents, they can disapprove of that precedent and create a new one even if they conflcit

How do you think you went though?

Yeah I guess you are right about the first question. To be perfectly honest with you, I saw governor general and assented and ran with it haha.

All in all i hope around 55-60 out of 70. I was expecting higher but this years exam kind of threw me off. How about yourself?

[michak]

It wasn't easy and it wasn't hard. I think the problem with the legal exam this year was around ambiguities and personal interpretation.

What questions were ambigious and up for personal interpretation?

I found the 1 question to be a little unclear as proclamation isn't a stage per say but a result of royal assent. The courts as a body that change law was a little odd. The damages question was a bit of a throw off considering it was 5 marks and the supreme court precedent question.

The first question was obiviously proclamation because it gave the date that royal assent was given
I agree with the damages one, had no idea what to write for 4 marks, kinda waffled a bit
The supreme court one was that courts on the same level don't have to follow their already exisiting precedents, they can disapprove of that precedent and create a new one even if they conflcit

How do you think you went though?

Yeah I guess you are right about the first question. To be perfectly honest with you, I saw governor general and assented and ran with it haha.

All in all i hope around 55-60 out of 70. I was expecting higher but this years exam kind of threw me off. How about yourself?

To be honest I was pretty happy with this exam with the one exception being 4 marks on damages question
Well for teh whole year i have wanted to 60/70 at least so hopefully i can get that 

[Pa007]

It wasn't easy and it wasn't hard. I think the problem with the legal exam this year was around ambiguities and personal interpretation.

What questions were ambigious and up for personal interpretation?

I found the 1 question to be a little unclear as proclamation isn't a stage per say but a result of royal assent. The courts as a body that change law was a little odd. The damages question was a bit of a throw off considering it was 5 marks and the supreme court precedent question.

The first question was obiviously proclamation because it gave the date that royal assent was given
I agree with the damages one, had no idea what to write for 4 marks, kinda waffled a bit
The supreme court one was that courts on the same level don't have to follow their already exisiting precedents, they can disapprove of that precedent and create a new one even if they conflcit

How do you think you went though?

Yeah I guess you are right about the first question. To be perfectly honest with you, I saw governor general and assented and ran with it haha.

All in all i hope around 55-60 out of 70. I was expecting higher but this years exam kind of threw me off. How about yourself?

To be honest I was pretty happy with this exam with the one exception being 4 marks on damages question
Well for teh whole year i have wanted to 60/70 at least so hopefully i can get that 

That's good to hear, hope all goes well for you and good luck with the rest of your exams 

[KristyDanielle]

Crap. Why did I post this? Everyone's replies are making me feel awful about my own answers lol. I went with royal assent with the first question as it showed the bill becoming an act. I'm probably wrong. I don't feel good about this.

[michak]

Don't worry about one question it was only 2 marks
Im sure you did really well with the rest of the paper

[sabrin.s95]

Shit!! I answered royal assent and I was so confident with that answer..I hated the court question, the damages question, and the VCAT&Victorian parliament questions. Hopefully I answered correctly!!

[KristyDanielle]

Don't worry about one question it was only 2 marks
Im sure you did really well with the rest of the paper

Thanks! I hope. However I think I got the Court of Appeal precedent question wrong too. Damn. Are you absolutely sure it was proclamation?