HSC TuteSmart: limited places remaining - Click here. | VCE TuteSmart: access Early Bird Offer (FREE Study Guides) - Click here.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

December 15, 2018, 04:18:51 am

Author Topic: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread  (Read 169630 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ilikeapples

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2040 on: September 17, 2018, 06:22:28 pm »
0
In terms of Australian responses to international crime... I have a bunch of information on statute law and legislation such as the ratification of the Rome Statute.. but not so much on common law. I am finding it difficult to find cases of crimes against the international community heard in Australian courts, anyone have any information on this or any specific cases... anything is greatly appreciated!

katgrace1

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2041 on: September 19, 2018, 04:28:32 pm »
+2
In terms of Australian responses to international crime... I have a bunch of information on statute law and legislation such as the ratification of the Rome Statute.. but not so much on common law. I am finding it difficult to find cases of crimes against the international community heard in Australian courts, anyone have any information on this or any specific cases... anything is greatly appreciated!

When looking at common law, you will struggle as the ICC Acts was only established in 2002. Hence any crime against humanity prior to 2002 is not prosecutable in Australia. It may be better to focus on extradition such as Dragan Vasiljokovic as other courts have the jurisdiction. It may be also well noting that in the common law system an everyday person cannot just prosecute against another person for these crimes (particularly head of states) without consent from the attorney general. E.g In 2011 an Australian citizen in the Victorian magistrates court claimed President Mahinda Rajapaksa had committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. The indictment filed was refused by the attorney general due to 'head of state immunity'. Hence I would focus on the ICC and note that atm it is hard to establish effectiveness of both international and domestic mechanisms due to the mechanisms being relatively new. (Less than 20 years is not significant considering there has been no significant crimes in this period in Australia). It may be worth investigating further into Australia being a haven for war criminals as a result. (Plenty of media articles on this). Hope this helps.

ilikeapples

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2042 on: September 19, 2018, 09:38:45 pm »
0
Okay thanks heaps  :D

Lilabear123

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2043 on: October 06, 2018, 11:54:51 pm »
0
Hi,

In essays, do we need to know which section of an act we are referring to? E.g. for CROC, the specific articles. It seems like a lot extra to memorise.

Thanks :)

fantasticbeasts3

  • MOTM: SEP 17
  • HSC Moderator
  • Forum Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 993
  • ich kann... ein bisschen Deutsch?
  • Respect: +668
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2044 on: October 07, 2018, 12:46:30 am »
+1
Hi,

In essays, do we need to know which section of an act we are referring to? E.g. for CROC, the specific articles. It seems like a lot extra to memorise.

Thanks :)

Hi!

Nope, not necessary :-)
HSC 2017: English (Standard) // Mathematics // Modern History // Legal Studies // Business Studies
2018-2022: Bachelor of International Studies/Bachelor of Media (PR & Advertising) @ UNSW

Are you a UNSW student? If you don't mind, chuck some Semester 2 subject reviews here!

Lilabear123

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2045 on: October 07, 2018, 01:12:12 am »
0

Razeen25

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +19
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2046 on: October 07, 2018, 11:54:11 pm »
0
Maybe I'm just being dramatic here (since HSC is a few days away), but do people ACTUALLY memorise legislations, media articles, cases, international instruments, reports/documents and statistics for EVERY legal dot point? Like in most subjects, the content straight from the syllabus is pretty much all there is to learn. But legal isn't just content heavy, but needing to know the additional LMCDI for every dot point just seems impossible to me. Like how. In trials I just memorised LMCDI for a few parts of the Option topics, and a few per main section of the crime syllabus and thankfully the questions reflected that. But in HSC, I know especially for crime, they can ask for specific areas and at this point I feel like english has less to memorise than legal tbh smh.
HSC 2018
English Advanced (87) || General Mathematics 2 (95) || Biology (90) || Legal Studies (91) || Business Studies (94) ||

fantasticbeasts3

  • MOTM: SEP 17
  • HSC Moderator
  • Forum Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 993
  • ich kann... ein bisschen Deutsch?
  • Respect: +668
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2047 on: October 08, 2018, 08:10:39 am »
+3
Maybe I'm just being dramatic here (since HSC is a few days away), but do people ACTUALLY memorise legislations, media articles, cases, international instruments, reports/documents and statistics for EVERY legal dot point? Like in most subjects, the content straight from the syllabus is pretty much all there is to learn. But legal isn't just content heavy, but needing to know the additional LMCDI for every dot point just seems impossible to me. Like how. In trials I just memorised LMCDI for a few parts of the Option topics, and a few per main section of the crime syllabus and thankfully the questions reflected that. But in HSC, I know especially for crime, they can ask for specific areas and at this point I feel like english has less to memorise than legal tbh smh.

Hi!

You donít need to memorise LCMs for every dot point. Itís really up to the person to decide how extra they want to be with their LCMs (usually the more, the better). If you feel like itís unnecessary to memorise them for a specific dot point, trust your judgement. I memorised LCMs for every dot point except for the first part of crime and my option topics and I came out alright lol

Basically, trust your judgement on how many LCMs you need. If you feel like itís excessive, it probably is.

Best of luck!
HSC 2017: English (Standard) // Mathematics // Modern History // Legal Studies // Business Studies
2018-2022: Bachelor of International Studies/Bachelor of Media (PR & Advertising) @ UNSW

Are you a UNSW student? If you don't mind, chuck some Semester 2 subject reviews here!

Hello0there

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2048 on: October 12, 2018, 09:19:17 pm »
0
Hey there!

Can anyone tell me if when referencing articles in an essay I should write out the full name? My teacher said writing the source and the date posted will be enough and save time. What do you think?

Thanks!

fantasticbeasts3

  • MOTM: SEP 17
  • HSC Moderator
  • Forum Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 993
  • ich kann... ein bisschen Deutsch?
  • Respect: +668
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2049 on: October 12, 2018, 09:31:11 pm »
+1
Hey there!

Can anyone tell me if when referencing articles in an essay I should write out the full name? My teacher said writing the source and the date posted will be enough and save time. What do you think?

Thanks!

Hi!

Just the source and date posted is fine :-)
HSC 2017: English (Standard) // Mathematics // Modern History // Legal Studies // Business Studies
2018-2022: Bachelor of International Studies/Bachelor of Media (PR & Advertising) @ UNSW

Are you a UNSW student? If you don't mind, chuck some Semester 2 subject reviews here!

Razeen25

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +19
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2050 on: October 13, 2018, 03:03:08 am »
0
Hi!

You donít need to memorise LCMs for every dot point. Itís really up to the person to decide how extra they want to be with their LCMs (usually the more, the better). If you feel like itís unnecessary to memorise them for a specific dot point, trust your judgement. I memorised LCMs for every dot point except for the first part of crime and my option topics and I came out alright lol

Basically, trust your judgement on how many LCMs you need. If you feel like itís excessive, it probably is.

Best of luck!

This gave peace of mind, thank you! :).
HSC 2018
English Advanced (87) || General Mathematics 2 (95) || Biology (90) || Legal Studies (91) || Business Studies (94) ||

markkhodair

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2051 on: October 14, 2018, 01:58:53 pm »
0
Hey! My textbook and crime notes show self-defence as a complete defence, however in HSC multiple choice questions regarding defences, self-defence is always the answer to "which defence is a partial defence" or blah blah. Could someone clarify why it's a partial defence? And also why everywhere I look, self-defence is stated as a complete defence? Thank you!

emilyygeorgexx

  • MOTM: OCT 18
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 252
  • Respect: +55
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2052 on: October 14, 2018, 03:05:07 pm »
+1
Hey! My textbook and crime notes show self-defence as a complete defence, however in HSC multiple choice questions regarding defences, self-defence is always the answer to "which defence is a partial defence" or blah blah. Could someone clarify why it's a partial defence? And also why everywhere I look, self-defence is stated as a complete defence? Thank you!

Hey!

Im pretty sure self defence can be taken as both. So say in the case of R v Smith 2008, where the defendant suffered 30+ years of domestic violence, attempted to kill her husband but as she raised self defence her case was acquitted and thus was used as a full defence. On the other hand in the case of R v Silva 2015, she killed her partner after long-term abuse and raised self defence, her charges were dropped from murder to manslaughter and thus she received a suspended sentence. So, I think it really just depends on the situation.

If you are referring to the 2017 HSC question which asked which of the following is a partial defence, self defence was the correct answer because it was MOST correct. One of the options was not a defence and the other 2 options were full defences, thus making self defence the most correct answer.
HSC 2018 (ATAR: 99.10)
English Advanced (90) | General Mathematics 2 (95) | Business Studies (98 - 6th in NSW) | Legal Studies (94) | Economics (93) | Studies of Religion 1 (48)

markkhodair

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2053 on: October 14, 2018, 05:27:13 pm »
0
Hey!

Im pretty sure self defence can be taken as both. So say in the case of R v Smith 2008, where the defendant suffered 30+ years of domestic violence, attempted to kill her husband but as she raised self defence her case was acquitted and thus was used as a full defence. On the other hand in the case of R v Silva 2015, she killed her partner after long-term abuse and raised self defence, her charges were dropped from murder to manslaughter and thus she received a suspended sentence. So, I think it really just depends on the situation.

If you are referring to the 2017 HSC question which asked which of the following is a partial defence, self defence was the correct answer because it was MOST correct. One of the options was not a defence and the other 2 options were full defences, thus making self defence the most correct answer.

Thank you so much! Also, not sure if you'll be able to answer this based on the options you may have completed for legal studies, but for those who can, what is the main message we should try to make or send across when writing a family law essay? I understand that each question asks for something different, but we never really got to finish family law before graduation, and I'm kind of nervous about it. With my other option, I always know what I should be revolving my arguments around, but for family, I don't.

Thank you!

splimestudios

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: 0
Re: HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #2054 on: October 14, 2018, 06:41:56 pm »
0
Hi all you litigators,

I'm just wondering with regard to workplace, I've been doing a fair bit of prep with regard to structuring how I would write an essay in response to certain syllabus points, and in relation to the Learn To: "evaluate the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in protecting and recognising workplace rights" from the 'regulating the workplace' section I was thinking of structuring it like this, but I want to know your thoughts if this still relates to what they're after, as the biggest fear for me is to write an essay outside of where the question is targetted in the syllabus.

Paragraph 1: Talk about Fair Work Act incl. introduction of enterprise agreements, collective bargaining etc. + FWC and FWO. Then go into detail how the BOOT test and enforceability of BOOT test by FWC ensures workplace rights to min. wages and so on are upheld w/ case reference.

Paragraph 2: It's only a very small part in the textbook despite spending a lot of time on it in class, but vicarious liability seems to me to be a big part of workplace law but idk if it still comes under the umbrella of 'workplace regulation'. I was gonna talk about Hollis v Vabu case and then a recent discrimination case where AUS Post was found culpable of refusing to act on complaints about some girl being racially abused in the workplace. I was planning of then linking this to how it upholds rights to be free from discrimination by regulating companies to act within means of the law. BUT this is the section that concerns me because I'm not sure if I can talk about this? Let me know pleaseee..

Paragraph 3: If the q relates to non-legal as well, then I'd talk about Trade Unions and their involvement in the third paragraph. I'm fairly sure this is pretty standard and I have the QANTAS case to back me up in terms of effectiveness for workers' justice and rights are easy to link to ICCPR.

The other thing is in relation to Family Law - I'm just wondering with regard to Domestic Violence how one would structure an essay in response to a q like 'how does familly law respond to conflict in families'. My teacher seems to think we should all avoid and do the other q option if we get something specifically with regard to DV but I'm interested in it, but apparently most of the time students end up writing Crime essays and mentioning ADVOs and BOCSAR statistics to discuss effectiveness. I'm just a little bit confused of what you'd write, as she thinks you need to ensure everything is linked to family Law which is understandable cause' it is Family Law - but how would you talk about DV in relation to Family Law without going off into a crime essay. My textbook seems contradictory and talks about ADVOs and so on and the failures of it so I'm just a little unsure of what to do in the case that NESA throws in a cheeky DV q on us.

Thanks all!
« Last Edit: October 14, 2018, 06:51:24 pm by splimestudios »