Legal Studies Tutoring

Hi All,

This year I am offering my services as a tutor. I finished year 12 in 2013 and have just begun studing a Law and Commerce double degree at Monash University. Over the two years I completed my VCE I studied English, Legal Studies, History: Revolutions, Methods, Physics and French.  All of the scores that I got were 40 or above. Primarily, I am offering tutoring in Legal (50) , Physics (42) and English (44).

I live in the south east of Melbourne, postcode 3807. I am available for private tutoring sessions in the local area. I am also willing to travel into the city and meet at the State Library for sessions on weekends or perhaps weekdays as per our arrangment.  I will be offering private hour long one-on-one tutoring sessions as well as group sessions with a max of 3 people (at a discounted price). So if you and some friends are looking for a bit of help from a high scoring vce student get in touch. Please use the contact me form at the bottom of the page on the resources tab or email me at jball@nex.net.au with your name and location and we can negotiate prices.

Thanks very much,

Jordan B

 

A new year

Hi to the 2014 class of Legal Studies students,

Im sorry for my hiatus this far this year. I resolved to relax for as long as possible, but now the year is at full swing for you and for me.

I intend to continue the maintence of this blog to do the most I can to help. I will largely be refreshing and reposting the information from the same time last year to bring the relevant information to the fore. However if you are slightly ahead (or I am operating behind) ou can always use the index and contents as a means to find whats relevant for you.

Under the resources tab there is a host of notes and essays i wrote during my year of Legal Studies fun. In addition I am offering tutoring for Legal and a number of other subjects. Information about this to follow.

I wish you the best for the upcoming year and I hope it has started as well for you as it has for me.

Stay tuned,

JB

BEST OF LUCK

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to wish you all best for your exam this afternoon! I hope you are feeling prepared and confident. Regardless of how you are feeling remember to stay calm and remember that what is done is done. Dont spend the rest of the morning cramming. Again, Best of luck to each and everyone of you. I know the stresses of these exams but i can also tell you of the relief you will feel at 5:15 I hope you are all happy with what you have acheived this year and I wish you all the best in the future.

Kind Regards,

J0rdan Ball

A question from Katherine

Hi all,

I recently got asked the following:

“Would the juries act 2000 be considered as a recent reform? And would i be able to use brodies law as an example of changing expectations of the legal system?”

Ill tackle the easy part of that question first.

Brodies Law:

Brodies law was introduced following the outcry of the general public prompted by a well advertised case of work place bullying. To Katherine and all the other readers, Brodies can be used both as a means to reflect the changing expectations of the legal system (ie of the people who it serves) and the fact that the Commonwealth Government must represent the people (ie it was introduced to reflect the seriousness of the publics opinion of bullying).

As such Brodies is a useful example because it can be used in a variety of situations.

Juries Act 2000:

Thanks to my legal teacher Mr Mavridis for setting me on the right track:

“Reforms should be 5 years. In terms of recent reforms for jury, there was an amendment in 2010 to the 2000 act. This reduced groups previously ineligible and halved the waiting time of ineligibility after leaving job.

The recent reform increased jury eligibility by allowing for increased numbers of those previously ineligible. eg since 2010, former judges, lawyers etc who left their legal job at least 5 years before are eligible.”

Therefore, the Juries Act 2000 is too early, but the 2010 amendment makes a good reform for the course!

I personally always liked the Broadmedows Mediation Pilot program which expanded the use of mediation in the Magistrates court up to the value of $40,000. And its recent because since 2007 it has been expanded across 6 other locations (in 2009, 2011 and then just 2 days ago on November 2nd 2013).

I hope that provides a little food for thought,

Regards,

Jordan Ball

Parliament as Law Makers – A question from Maddy

Hello All,

I am hoping that you are all studying hard. English is tomorrow and I wish everybody well for that. Im sorry I havent been posting more stuff Ive just been so mental.

I was asked by Maddy to provide some insite into Parliament as law maker evaluations. I was not able to track down a copy of this evaluation so I thought Id take the relevant excerpt from my notes. This is a sample of the Unit 3 summary that is avaliable on the Resources tab.

If you are interested in purchasing any of the notes send me an email on the contact form on the Resources tab and Ill work out a deal for you.

So here it goes:

Strengths and weaknesses of law making by parliament

• Parliament is the supreme/sovereign law maker
• Creates laws that encourage social cohesion
• Primary Function
  • Create laws the rep the views and values of majority
  • And respond to our needs

Is our Parl representing the people?

• +
  • On the whole, effective, creates laws that rep our views and values
  • Parliamentarians are given mandate to fulfil key principles
  • Laws may evolve/change
  • Example
    • Decrim of Abortion 2008 demonstrated parl willing to create laws that uphold democratic values of our community
  • Laws that rep our views and values achieved by voicing them through formal and informal means
  • Example
    • Petitions and VLRC, directly inform Parl of comm. Views and desire for change.
    • Jane Ashton, 20,000 abrogation of Provocation 2005
• –
  • May be unwilling or unable to rep view and values in leg
  • May be restricted by vocal minorities who utilise informal means (media) to reduce chance of change
  • Example
    • Gina Rhinehard, mining tax quashed
  • May not rep as are voted along party lines and not conscience vote
• Evenso, creates good laws that rep people, are supported by comm.

Create laws that respond to Commonwealth needs?

• +
  • Can create laws ‘in futuro’ (for future) and also retrospectively.
  • Vic parl introduced Upskirting Act 2007 to guarantee that the law was overcoming loop holes and protecting privacy from infringement
  • Can create new laws or amend ineffective ones, codify good precedent.
• –
  • Unwilling or unable to respond
  • If laws not up to date, create legal uncertainty
  • IVF was not legislated until 1982 (2 years after first IVF child)
  • Controversial suggestions may be rejected for fear of voter backlash.
  • Example
    •  Silent on abortion until 2008, had to rely on R v. Davidson 1969 to provide guidance
  • Even though formal bodies exist (VLRC) no guarantee of change.
  • Therefore may not respond to comm. Needs.
  • Limited further by no. of sitting days 2011 vic parl sat for only 54 days, unable to deal with quantity of legislation.

IS Parl effective due to its process?

• One positive, Constitution provides detailed legal framework
• Bicameral structure ensures extensive debate and review
• As gov rarely controls both houses this is effective, in cases that gov does becomes rubber stamp. (ie Howard and Work Choices)

 

I hope this can give you a little help in your studies,

Regards,

JB

Doctrine of Precedence – a little bit of revision

Hi All,

As promised Ill try to consistently post some questions that I find. Its been a little while since a DOP question so here goes!

Outline the operation of the doctrine of precedent.

The courts are able to establish common law through application of the doctrine of precedent. The doctrine of precedent operates on the principle of stare decisis (to stand by a previous decision). This means that a similar outcome is applied to cases of similar facts. New precedents are created through novel cases (where no legislation exists) and also through statutory interpretation (where the meaning of legislation is unclear).

The nature of precedents depends upon which court it was established in. Binding precedents are created in superior courts of record and must be adhered to by all lower courts. In contrast persuasive precedents do not have to be followed but exist to provide legal guidance, these precedents comprise of the ratio decidendi (legal reasoning) of lower courts, courts of equal standings, from other state hierarchies (NSW), from other common law countries (South Africa) and also of obiter dictum (things said along the way) which act to provide insight and guidance from learned judges on hypothetical situations. The doctrine ensures consistency and fairness between like cases. Precedents are found in law reports that include the facts of the case, the decision, the ratio decidendi (legal reasoning) and obiter dicta.

Furthermore, the doctrine of precedent provides a number of means of flexibility to enable evolution in common law and prevent any miscarriages of justice. Distinguishing has been the most effective means to aid in evolution as it establishes new common law if it is deemed the facts of a case are sufficiently different that an injustice would occur through the application of the precedent. In addition the method of reversing was demonstrated in the Studded Belt Case 1993 where the case was heard on appeal and the judge in the Supreme court determined that the case had been wrongfully decided in the magistrates court and according ‘reversed’ the previous decision replacing the old ratio decidendi with the new legal reasoning. Finally, the means of overruling and disapproving also aid in the flexibility of the doctrine of precedent.

(judging by length its a big 6 marker but also too small for an 8)

Keep Studying Hard!

JB

Questions, questions, questions

Hi all,

I know some of you will have or be just about to complete your final sacs for the year! So well done to you all. Im well aware of the stresses and worries that you are facing.

Ive gone through this period once for two subjects, im now doing it again with four.

Some advice from a survivor. Things may seem difficult, if not near impossible at times, but keep plugging away. There is only a couple of months to go so you are on the final push!

My suggestion is to get those notes sorted pronto! I dont suggest that you rewrite all those notes you have taken this year. This is the point where summaries are crucial. Pick a topic, sit down and write out what you remember purely off the top of your head. From there collate the information from your notes into brutally concise dot point form. You want it so that it is a summary which triggers your memory, not states every single word. If anything, just summaries it with the key mark words and remember that. then on the day just run through that stream of words and connect the dots!

In the month before the exam I did a paper a day so make sure you get on to your teachers, and other teachers and track down as many as possible! they are the best possible form of revision. I also cannot speak highly enough for check points. Use those to get to grips with questions you struggle with but then get back on the papers!

If you need any advice there is a contact me opportunity on the resources page. Shoot me an email and Ill endevour to get back to you as quickly as possible.

If I find any more questions, Ill post them 🙂

 

Enjoy your holidays/study breaks,

JB

 

Criminal Procedure – Question 5

Hi All,

Here is an early version of the essay that I have for sale regarding the effectiveness of the legal system. This copy is by no means perfect nor am i sure if it would receive 10 marks, but I thought I would give it to you as an example of what is available.

Identify two problems that can affect the effective operation of the legal system, for each provide one change or proposed change that has or will improve the effective operation of the legal system. (10 marks)

Two issues that can affect the effective operation of the legal system include access and timely resolution of disputes.

Access of the legal system is frequently limited as a result of the high costs required to undertake legal action. A large part of this cost is as a result of the need for legal representation. The cost of dispute resolution is increased dramatically as the parties are required to find as much as $300-500 an hour to hire legal representation in the Supreme Court. The extensive costs frequently result in the dispute being forgotten as a result of parties not having enough financial means to undertake legal action. In 2009 the Supreme Court introduced compulsory mediation during the civil pre-trial procedures of the Supreme Court. As legal representation is not required and independent mediators cost  considerably less ($75 an hour) a considerable amount of money is saved for the parties as they attempt to resolve their dispute through alternative means.

Another issue effecting the effective operation of the legal system includes the timely resolution of disputes. Criminal pre-trial procedures, particularly committal hearings have been argued by many to decrease the ability of parties to access timely resolution of their disputes. Former director of the DPP argues that committal hearings are a pointless waste of time as prosecutors can chose to ignore the decision of the magistrate regarding a prima facie case, that is, if there is enough evidence that there is a likely chance of convincing the jury beyond all reasonable doubt. Rapke argues that given the final decision is down to the prosecutor the process of committal hearings should be abolished. This proposed change would be beneficial as the time required to hear a case would be reduced which would be particularly advantageous for those held in remand as their case can then be heard sooner rather than later, saving them from being held for an extended period even if they are not guilty. Even if the individual is found not guilty, he/she is then not able to gain any compensation for the time during which they were deprived of their freedom. However, the abolition of the Committal Hearings process would remove an essential filtering process from the legal system resulting in some cases being pursued that may waste time and money in pursuing non prima facie cases.

Overall, many reforms and recommendations have been made to improve the effectiveness of the legal system to resolve disputes affordably and in a timely manner.

I hope you find this helpful,

JB

Criminal Procedure – Question 4

Hi All,

Describe and evaluate one sanction available to the courts.

The most severe punishment available to the courts in criminal matters is imprisonment. Imprisonment involves the removal of an individual from society and his/her detainment in a prison facility. The main purpose is to deter individuals and society at large from committing crimes so as to be able to avoid imprisonment. At this, imprisonment is very effective. An alternative purpose of imprisonment is rehabilitation, despite this aim the rate of recidivism in Victoria remains high at 36% demonstrating that the imprisonment is ineffective at achieving this purpose as individuals continue to reoffend.

I hope you find this helpful,

JB

Criminal Procedure – Question 3

Hi All,

I figured some of you might not like good ol’ DTO’s. So here is another sanction. Basically its one of my proforma answers that covers just about anything relevant to it. Way too much for a 2 marker so im inclined to say 3/4. And then I have to be glad I can write really quick.

Describe and evaluate one sanction available to the courts.

The courts are able to apply fines as a form of punishment. Fines take the form of a monetary punishment which is the most commonly used sanction in the criminal system. They are used largely for traffic infringements and crimes including fraud. The main purpose is to deter the individuals and the community from committing a crime. Fines are effective for those of lower socioeconomic status as they are deterred from committing crimes in order to ensure that they are not forced to pay money, while they can be ineffective for high income earners who are more capable of being unaffected by financial outlay, thus limiting their effectiveness to deter.

I hope you find this helpful,

JB