VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[MathsQuestIsBad]

Hey, I was wondering how to answer this question?

Contrast a sanction with a sentence.

Thanks

Haven't seen a question like that before, sanction and sentence can be used almost interchangeably so it'll be hard to contrast them since they are practically identical.

[Poet]

Haven't seen a question like that before, sanction and sentence can be used almost interchangeably so it'll be hard to contrast them since they are practically identical.

This is true - they are super similar. Went to ever-helpful Wikipedia (don't worry, I checked it against Mirriam-Webster haha  ) and here's the separate definitions:
"Sanctions are penalties or other means of enforcement used to provide incentives for obedience with the law, or with rules and regulations."
"A sentence forms the final explicit act of a judge-ruled process as well as the symbolic principal act connected to their function. The sentence can generally involve a decree of imprisonment, a fine, and/or other punishments against a defendant convicted of a crime."

So basically, sanctions are the actual punishments, whilst sentences are where the judge details their decree. Not sure if this is particularly clear.
Would appreciate correction if I'm wrong.

edit: typo

[dsabeta]

I was just wondering if someone could provide me with the proper definition of prima facie? The closest thing to a definition that the Macmillan Legal Maze book seems to give is "determining whether a case has sufficient evidence" and I can't seem to find a definition at all in the Justice and Outcomes book. I remember Karly saying that it meant "on the facts" but I would greatly appreciate if someone could just clarify this for me cos I'm really confused 

[clarke54321]

I was just wondering if someone could provide me with the proper definition of prima facie? The closest thing to a definition that the Macmillan Legal Maze book seems to give is "determining whether a case has sufficient evidence" and I can't seem to find a definition at all in the Justice and Outcomes book. I remember Karly saying that it meant "on the facts" but I would greatly appreciate if someone could just clarify this for me cos I'm really confused 

Hello!

In very basic terms, it means on the face of it. And so, if a case is classified as a prima facie case, it essentially means that a case has been supported by sufficient evidence for it be taken as proven unless there is adequate evidence to the contrary. Hence, on deeper analysis (below the face of it), the result may be very different.

Hopefully this helps 

[meganrobyn]

I was just wondering if someone could provide me with the proper definition of prima facie? The closest thing to a definition that the Macmillan Legal Maze book seems to give is "determining whether a case has sufficient evidence" and I can't seem to find a definition at all in the Justice and Outcomes book. I remember Karly saying that it meant "on the facts" but I would greatly appreciate if someone could just clarify this for me cos I'm really confused 

Don't worry about the definition because you shouldn't be using the phrase anyway: it was replaced as the committals test in the late 1980s, and you should use the test from the Criminal Procedure Act. Check the VCAA Assessors Report from 2007, for instance, for the clear instruction to not use 'prima facie' because it won't get marks.

[Will.D12]

Was wondering if anyone could explain the difference between "Discovery of Documents" and "Exchange of Evidence" in civil pre-trial procedures. Thanks.

[MissSmiley]

Was wondering if anyone could explain the difference between "Discovery of Documents" and "Exchange of Evidence" in civil pre-trial procedures. Thanks.

Hello!
I'm doing Legal this year, so please just take my thoughts as another interpretation. Would love to hear anything else from other VCE lawyers! 
I think discovery stage is just focussed more on 'documents' rather than any witness statements or expert opinion statements, testimonies, oral evidence etc (more in exchange of evidence stage)
As exchange of evidence occurs later, it is important to get the facts of the case, each party's views, and any preliminary evidence (before we get any subjective evidence from the witnesses) down pat before moving on to asking witnesses.
I'm thinking of witness evidence as just supporting the plaintiff + defendant's actual claim. But to be able to do this, both parties must know each other's "actual claim."
This has to happen at the discovery stage.
Witness statements/actual verbal evidence + expert witness evidence will take place in the next stage.

I'm sorry if I've confused you, but once again, just saying this might be a small or could be a misinterpreted answer. So really looking forward to hearing what others have to say about this!

[meganrobyn]

Was wondering if anyone could explain the difference between "Discovery of Documents" and "Exchange of Evidence" in civil pre-trial procedures. Thanks.

Discovery is giving the other party a list of what you have (in an affidavit of documents); exchange/production is giving them copies.

[dsabeta]

Hi everyone,
Since the new study design is being implemented this year, according to my legal teacher (who confuses the life out of me), we have to be able to synthesise Acts into our answers except (a) she hasn't taught us how to do it, and (b) she has no resources regarding how to do it
For example, if we get a case study about a home invasion, we should be able to mention that Section 77A of the Crimes Act 1958 talks about home invasions etc.
Can someone please clarify this for me because I'm really confused about the whole thing and want to do it right
Thanks :-)

[MissSmiley]

Hi everyone,
Since the new study design is being implemented this year, according to my legal teacher (who confuses the life out of me), we have to be able to synthesise Acts into our answers except (a) she hasn't taught us how to do it, and (b) she has no resources regarding how to do it
For example, if we get a case study about a home invasion, we should be able to mention that Section 77A of the Crimes Act 1958 talks about home invasions etc.
Can someone please clarify this for me because I'm really confused about the whole thing and want to do it right
Thanks :-)

Hey!
No no we're not supposed to know what section and what act any crime / civil action relates to (because it's impossible to memorise what section and what subsection.
You should just know the sections of the rights of victims, accused and rights of parties in civil law and where they are located in their acts.
What I think your teacher means is that you're expected to memorise a handful of cases (as in court cases that are going on currently) for every AOS. For example memorise a case (just memorise the summary)  (and know how to cite it) where for e.g. the accused had to wait a lot until they could have their trial heard. Or a case where an accused was 'let off' on a less serious charge (plea negotiations) than what the communityand victims would have liked.
Then you can use case examples like this in your evaluate question. For example  you explain a strength of plea negotiations (e.g. reduces time) but then however, the victim may feel that the accused has settled to plead guilty to a less serious crime and in this way the gravity of the original crime may not be reflected. This is where you insert your real life court case about the plea negotiations.

If you get a hypothetical case study (and it's criminal law) in your SAC / exam, just think if it's a summary / indictable and just state the name of the act, no section required.
e.g. Wow! home invasion is an indictable offence? I thought it would have been in the summary offences act....Sorry! so yeah just say Crimes Act 1958 if you get an indictable offence.

How to cite a legal case?
It's in the oxford textbook first few pages or I guess something called the toolkit - I can't remember on the top of my head.

But if it's like a newspaper article, then you just name the parties involved and the newspaper's name the case was mentioned.

Hope I haven't confused you!!

Thanks!

[Poet]

Also, on top of MissSmiley's response, make sure you're using recent examples (within the past four years) or else your answers will not be seen as valid by VCAA.

[dsabeta]

Hey!
No no we're not supposed to know what section and what act any crime / civil action relates to (because it's impossible to memorise what section and what subsection.
You should just know the sections of the rights of victims, accused and rights of parties in civil law and where they are located in their acts.
What I think your teacher means is that you're expected to memorise a handful of cases (as in court cases that are going on currently) for every AOS. For example memorise a case (just memorise the summary)  (and know how to cite it) where for e.g. the accused had to wait a lot until they could have their trial heard. Or a case where an accused was 'let off' on a less serious charge (plea negotiations) than what the communityand victims would have liked.
Then you can use case examples like this in your evaluate question. For example  you explain a strength of plea negotiations (e.g. reduces time) but then however, the victim may feel that the accused has settled to plead guilty to a less serious crime and in this way the gravity of the original crime may not be reflected. This is where you insert your real life court case about the plea negotiations.

If you get a hypothetical case study (and it's criminal law) in your SAC / exam, just think if it's a summary / indictable and just state the name of the act, no section required.
e.g. Wow! home invasion is an indictable offence? I thought it would have been in the summary offences act....Sorry! so yeah just say Crimes Act 1958 if you get an indictable offence.

How to cite a legal case?
It's in the oxford textbook first few pages or I guess something called the toolkit - I can't remember on the top of my head.

But if it's like a newspaper article, then you just name the parties involved and the newspaper's name the case was mentioned.

Hope I haven't confused you!!

Thanks!

Thank you sosososo much - this makes so much more sense now!!!

[MissSmiley]

Hi everyone!

Just wondering, can sexual abuse be considered as a civil action? I sort of get how psychological abuse can be considered a civil claim, in that it infringes the right of an accused to live without psychological disturbance, but once again, I don't really understand this. All this was from a paragraph out of the Oxford textbook:

In 2015, VIC became the first state to remove limitation periods for persons who suffered physical or sexual abuse as a minor, or psychological abuse that arose out of that abuse. The changes to the law followed a Victorian parliamentary inquiry into the handling of child abuse by religious and other non-gov organisations which found that limitations were a major hurdle for victims who wished to initiate civil claims.

So I thought isn't sexual abuse and all of this a criminal offence?
If it is a civil claim, then does this refer to the civil tort 'assualt'?

Also, I don't quite understand why limitation of actions is a hurdle for victims who wish to initiate civil claim? Is it because having a strict time frame pressurises them into getting everything ready? (for e.g. if they've been hospitalised or are taking treatment from a counsellor as a result of suffering from the civil tort (or abuse like it's said) then they may find it harder to get the case ready before the time frame?

Is that why this is a hurdle?

Thanks a lot everyone!

[Lear]

I think the issue was that minors who were then not confident enough/had the ability to report such actions were unable to come forward in the future when they were older. More recently things such as the #metoo campaign has prompted those who have tried to forget their experiences to come forward and report the crimes that may have occurred many years before.

Also I think sexual abuse victims can pursue their own civil case along side the criminal trial on behalf of the DPP. This way they can receive a remedy for their rights being infringed and the criminal can also be sentenced.

[MissSmiley]

I think the issue was that minors who were then not confident enough/had the ability to report such actions were unable to come forward in the future when they were older. More recently things such as the #metoo campaign has prompted those who have tried to forget their experiences to come forward and report the crimes that may have occurred many years before.

Also I think sexual abuse victims can pursue their own civil case along side the criminal trial on behalf of the DPP. This way they can receive a remedy for their rights being infringed and the criminal can also be sentenced.

Amazing response, Lear!!
Makes much more sense now!
Aw? Is that the hurdle?! Your example about the #metoo campaign sounds reasonable, so yeah, now I do agree that that could have been a hurdle - minors trying to express themselves.
Ok!
Thanks so much Lear!