Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 28, 2024, 11:38:11 pm

Author Topic: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread  (Read 596257 times)  Share 

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

meganrobyn

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +62
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #780 on: April 05, 2013, 12:07:06 am »
+2
Just quickly - there's no difference between evaluate, critically evaluate, critically examine, analyse, etc. It's all just an opinion plus discussing reasons for and against it.

Juxtaposing strengths with weaknesses is seen in all the best answers; it doesn't sound fluent or balanced without at least some of it. BUT! You can easily do one strength balanced against two or three weaknesses, or vice versa. It doesn't need to be one to one. Also, frequently you are asked to evaluate a strength or evaluate a weakness - in this case you MUST pair them up.

Ten points isn't enough for the final 10-marker, though. For most people it wouldn't fill out to the third page, and it leaves you no backup at all if one of your points isn't good enough for a mark by itself.

The odds of getting a 10-marker *just* on evaluation of the Australian constitutional protection of rights, however...?

Know all five express rights, but be able to evaluate two or three of them.

Enforcement of constitutional rights is optional content regarding Australia's approach to protecting, and can be used in the comparison as well.

There is no fixed number of structural protections, as they are not listed in the Constitution; I would know maybe two, and be able to evaluate the extent of their protection a little.
[Update: full for 2018.] I give Legal lectures through CPAP, and am an author for the CPAP 'Legal Fundamentals' textbook and the Legal 3/4 Study Guide.
Available for private tutoring in English and Legal Studies.
Experience in Legal 3/4 assessing; author of Legal textbook; degrees in Law and English; VCE teaching experience in Legal Studies and English. Legal Studies [50] English [50] way back when.
Good luck!

AbominableMowman

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 589
  • Respect: +29
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #781 on: April 06, 2013, 03:24:29 pm »
0
For the Outcome 2 SAC, do we just have to remember cases  for the High Court Interpretation part or do we have to remember specific cases that relate to each of the express rights, specific sections of the constitution, etc.? I'm kinda confused as to which cases to remember because the book that I'm using (Justice & Outcomes) goes into detail with way too many cases, and the content is just all over the place imo. I've been using the AN study guide and studyon which is really helpful though.
2014 - VCE

2015 - 2017

michak

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 667
  • Respect: +21
  • School: Westbourne Grammar School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #782 on: April 06, 2013, 04:10:09 pm »
+1
For the Outcome 2 SAC, do we just have to remember cases  for the High Court Interpretation part or do we have to remember specific cases that relate to each of the express rights, specific sections of the constitution, etc.? I'm kinda confused as to which cases to remember because the book that I'm using (Justice & Outcomes) goes into detail with way too many cases, and the content is just all over the place imo. I've been using the AN study guide and studyon which is really helpful though.

You need to know a couple. At least one for the implied right (eg. theophanous case), the roach case for the right to vote and any case that shows tha balance of power shifting from state to commonwealth eg. tassie dam case. Also could use brislan as the high court is interpreting the constitution.

But yeah defs need to know a couple depending on the question :)
2011: Bio [36]
2012: Legal [42] PE [43] Chem [33] English [40] Methods [25] 
ATAR: 93.30
2013: B. Arts at Monash University
2014: Bachelor of Laws/Bachelor of Arts at Monash

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2593
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #783 on: April 06, 2013, 04:41:59 pm »
+1
You need to know a couple. At least one for the implied right (eg. theophanous case), the roach case for the right to vote and any case that shows tha balance of power shifting from state to commonwealth eg. tassie dam case. Also could use brislan as the high court is interpreting the constitution.

But yeah defs need to know a couple depending on the question :)
Just make sure you don't say there's an implied right to vote. We have 5 express rights, 1 implied right (political communication) currently found (more could be found), and then things that are structurally protected. Representative government protects our ability to vote.
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

michak

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 667
  • Respect: +21
  • School: Westbourne Grammar School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #784 on: April 06, 2013, 05:18:53 pm »
0
Just make sure you don't say there's an implied right to vote. We have 5 express rights, 1 implied right (political communication) currently found (more could be found), and then things that are structurally protected. Representative government protects our ability to vote.

Yeah sorry if i may have confused you but the theophanous case and others are examples for the implied right of freedom of speech on political matters
The right to vote is protected by sections 7 and 24 of the constitution that say the members of the house of representatives and senate must be directlly elected by the people.
2011: Bio [36]
2012: Legal [42] PE [43] Chem [33] English [40] Methods [25] 
ATAR: 93.30
2013: B. Arts at Monash University
2014: Bachelor of Laws/Bachelor of Arts at Monash

meganrobyn

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +62
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #785 on: April 06, 2013, 07:14:13 pm »
+2
For the Outcome 2 SAC, do we just have to remember cases  for the High Court Interpretation part or do we have to remember specific cases that relate to each of the express rights, specific sections of the constitution, etc.? I'm kinda confused as to which cases to remember because the book that I'm using (Justice & Outcomes) goes into detail with way too many cases, and the content is just all over the place imo. I've been using the AN study guide and studyon which is really helpful though.

1. You must know TWO High Court cases that affected the balance of power between state and Commonwealth parliaments - for 2-5 marks each (3 being most likely), focusing on the impact of the case.

2. You must know ONE High Court case that affected the constitutional protection of rights in Australia - for 2-5 marks (3 being most likely), focusing on the impact on rights protection. This case may concern express rights, the implied right, or one of the structural protections.

3. Any other cases are optional illustrations, and ought to be limited to 1-2 mark answers - students frequently spend WAYYY too long on examples, especially considering you get maybe half to one mark for them.
[Update: full for 2018.] I give Legal lectures through CPAP, and am an author for the CPAP 'Legal Fundamentals' textbook and the Legal 3/4 Study Guide.
Available for private tutoring in English and Legal Studies.
Experience in Legal 3/4 assessing; author of Legal textbook; degrees in Law and English; VCE teaching experience in Legal Studies and English. Legal Studies [50] English [50] way back when.
Good luck!

vashappenin

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 905
  • Respect: +31
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #786 on: April 08, 2013, 09:38:16 am »
+1
Is it vital to know section numbers when talking about restrictions on the comonwealth ans state parliament? And around how many do we need to know for both?
2013: English, Maths Methods, Further Maths, Legal Studies, HHD, Psychology
2014-present: Bachelor of Laws @ Monash University

Tutoring VCE English, Psych, Legal Studies and HHD in 2016! Tutoring via Skype too. PM me if you're interested :)

michak

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 667
  • Respect: +21
  • School: Westbourne Grammar School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #787 on: April 08, 2013, 10:10:36 am »
0
Is it vital to know section numbers when talking about restrictions on the comonwealth ans state parliament? And around how many do we need to know for both?

Yeah you need to know them and I would know them all if you can just to be safe
2011: Bio [36]
2012: Legal [42] PE [43] Chem [33] English [40] Methods [25] 
ATAR: 93.30
2013: B. Arts at Monash University
2014: Bachelor of Laws/Bachelor of Arts at Monash

meganrobyn

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +62
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #788 on: April 08, 2013, 03:22:23 pm »
+1
Is it vital to know section numbers when talking about restrictions on the comonwealth ans state parliament? And around how many do we need to know for both?

You don't need to know any section numbers apart from ss51 and 109. There is a difference between the minimum knowledge required and the best students, however.
[Update: full for 2018.] I give Legal lectures through CPAP, and am an author for the CPAP 'Legal Fundamentals' textbook and the Legal 3/4 Study Guide.
Available for private tutoring in English and Legal Studies.
Experience in Legal 3/4 assessing; author of Legal textbook; degrees in Law and English; VCE teaching experience in Legal Studies and English. Legal Studies [50] English [50] way back when.
Good luck!

AbominableMowman

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 589
  • Respect: +29
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #789 on: April 09, 2013, 12:16:29 pm »
0
Wait.. So voting doesn't come under the implied right of political communication? I believe in the book it says 'Constitutional freedom of political communication protects federal voting'.
Also.. Is the right to vote considered a seperate structural protection, outlined in S41: 'no adult person who has or acquires a right to vote at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of a State shall, while the right continues, be prevented by any law of the Commonwealth from voting at elections for either House of the Parliament of the Commonwealth.'
This right to vote thing is confusing the hell out of me..
2014 - VCE

2015 - 2017

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2593
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #790 on: April 09, 2013, 01:02:20 pm »
+1
Wait.. So voting doesn't come under the implied right of political communication? I believe in the book it says 'Constitutional freedom of political communication protects federal voting'.
Also.. Is the right to vote considered a seperate structural protection, outlined in S41: 'no adult person who has or acquires a right to vote at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of a State shall, while the right continues, be prevented by any law of the Commonwealth from voting at elections for either House of the Parliament of the Commonwealth.'
This right to vote thing is confusing the hell out of me..
To my understanding,  the 'right' to vote (I use the term loosely), is structurally protected by representative government. This is why only one of Roach's challenged succeeded and the other failed; elections happen every three and a bit years or something, so if you're in jail for ten years, you aren't a part of society for the political party's term of office, so they aren't representing you. If you're in jail for under three years (this was the legislation reaffirmed in the Roach case), then you will be a part of society for some portion of the party's office, so should be represented. (I could be corrected?)
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

unfamila

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 142
  • Lad
  • Respect: +1
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #791 on: April 09, 2013, 01:06:58 pm »
0
To my understanding,  the 'right' to vote (I use the term loosely), is structurally protected by representative government. This is why only one of Roach's challenged succeeded and the other failed; elections happen every three and a bit years or something, so if you're in jail for ten years, you aren't a part of society for the political party's term of office, so they aren't representing you. If you're in jail for under three years (this was the legislation reaffirmed in the Roach case), then you will be a part of society for some portion of the party's office, so should be represented. (I could be corrected?)
^^^
That's what I learnt.

michak

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 667
  • Respect: +21
  • School: Westbourne Grammar School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #792 on: April 09, 2013, 03:39:52 pm »
0
Wait.. So voting doesn't come under the implied right of political communication? I believe in the book it says 'Constitutional freedom of political communication protects federal voting'.
Also.. Is the right to vote considered a seperate structural protection, outlined in S41: 'no adult person who has or acquires a right to vote at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of a State shall, while the right continues, be prevented by any law of the Commonwealth from voting at elections for either House of the Parliament of the Commonwealth.'
This right to vote thing is confusing the hell out of me..

Yeah Brendan is right on this. The right to vote is structurally protected by representive government. Sections 7 and 24 say that the house of reps and senate shall be directly elected by the people. However the isn't a full right to vote as the commonwealth can put restrictions on this such as kids, mentally ill and people in jail for me than 3 years (because they are considered to not have the same moral values of society)

Yeah if you are using the old key concepts book it still has the right to vote as an implied right but it defiantly isn't. Only implied right is freedom of speech on political matters

That make sense foreveryeti?
2011: Bio [36]
2012: Legal [42] PE [43] Chem [33] English [40] Methods [25] 
ATAR: 93.30
2013: B. Arts at Monash University
2014: Bachelor of Laws/Bachelor of Arts at Monash

AbominableMowman

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 589
  • Respect: +29
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #793 on: April 09, 2013, 03:43:22 pm »
0
Yeah Brendan is right on this. The right to vote is structurally protected by representive government. Sections 7 and 24 say that the house of reps and senate shall be directly elected by the people. However the isn't a full right to vote as the commonwealth can put restrictions on this such as kids, mentally ill and people in jail for me than 3 years (because they are considered to not have the same moral values of society)

Yeah if you are using the old key concepts book it still has the right to vote as an implied right but it defiantly isn't. Only implied right is freedom of speech on political matters

That make sense foreveryeti?
Yeep that makes sense. How about Section 41 though is that relevant at all?
2014 - VCE

2015 - 2017

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2593
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #794 on: April 09, 2013, 03:48:35 pm »
0
I'd lean towards no, unless you can use it to show off your skills and it's part of a judge's ratio. It's not specified in the study design and tbh I've never heard of it before. Megan should probably answer this question though hahaha
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️