VCE Legal Studies Exam 2011 review
By Heath McGregor on Nov 15, 2011 in VCE Exams, VCE Legal Studies
Congrats one and all for finishing the VCE Legal studies exam for 2011. How was the paper? What was hard or easy?
Please let us know your thoughts below. Please be respectful and keep your comments clean. Cheers, Heath
(4 votes, average: 3.75 out of 5)
Loading ...
mai | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
it was easy but hard
mai | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
easy to get a 70 hard to get a 90 , for the precedtn question did anyone write the precedent was binding
2 | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
it was a decent paper, what did people get for the recent changes in the legal system?
Hi | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
I said that the position of the court determined if a precedent was binding.. and I put reversing and distinguishing and all that? I said ratio decidendi forms the obligatory part.. forgot about binding.. oops..
Tony | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
finished with about 20-30 minutes left, i felt it was quite hard exam, expecially compared with 2010′s exam, I stuffed up the question about precedents and some of the marks for some of the questions (like the pre-trial civil procedures) was stupid … hoping for at least 65/70 but I’m certianly not confident
ria | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
was an effect of statutory interpretation doctrine of precedent. not sure abt that….
mai | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
i wrote that a recent change was the addition of he koori corut
jaz | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
i said the koori court/tribunals was a recent change in the legal system
mai | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
court
someguy | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
easy exam, just the marks were stupid, did anyone else find it difficult what the question was really asking?
someguy | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
how did people structure the last question
?
Victoria | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
omg ok just to clarify: There were no questions that asked about another countries protection of rights or brislans case/Tasmania dam case??????
I studied heaps but half of the stuff i expected wasn’t in the paper. It was quite a suprise!!
Lisa | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
i thought i did pretty well, but some of the questions were a bit ambiguous. like… for the “indetify/describe the impact of one method of changing the constitution”… it was like 5 marks, so did everyone put an example down for it? i did just in case.. ._.
Lisa | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Also.. for recent change, i did the amendment to the jurors act 2000.. i hope that was an alright change.. lol
Ally | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
yes mai so did i! is that right? did anyone find it too long with the extra 10 marks? there was some good straightforward qs on there…
Legalstudies | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
I found it alright.. but i did stuff up on the recent changes. i think you were supposed to write VCAT?
elcat | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
i wrote that in the 07-08 financial year more funds were injected by the comm and vic to legal aid, with improves the operation of the legal system because it promotes access to the legal system because there is more availability to financial aid dadadada…. anyone else surprised that there was no country comparison question?!?!
reen | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
oh man. that question about effective access within civil pre-trial procedures? maaannnn. i wrote a whole lot of crap. other than that i think the exam was pretty good.
44 | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
i struggled with the time. i needed more
Hi | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
what did people put for the avoiding precedent q.. that was the shittest question in the whole paper
bb | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
It was pretty ok…but i felt there was so much missing. I studied for so much and the exam only covered a minuscule part of it. For that precedent question did we have to write about persuasive precedent because i kind of forgot…
3948 | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
what about that question ” how do civil pretrial procedures increase effective access?”
3948 | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
recent change i discussed how more cases are being reffered to vcat
avicii | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
what did people write for the 8 mark question comparing VCAT and courts? i had no idea to write on legal rep and rules of e + p …
i talked only about mediation, conciliation and arbitration. how many marks do you think i’ll get? only 2 out of the 8?
Zafaraaaa | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
It was okay, but ambiguously worded questions were thrown about here and there =/
For the 10 marker, did we need to discuss alternatives and reforms to the jury system??
Or just evaluate strengths and weaknesses and describe the role of VLRC??
and if we didn’t give any alternatives/reforms, would we lose a lot of marks??
A | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Long exam, didn’t fully complete 3 questions. The one on civil pre- trial procedure was difficult as what did you need to include. Evalute role of judge I only got 1 strength/weakness didn’t know what else to put. For precedent I put medium extent as lower courts are binded and high court can distinguish but what were the breakdown of marks. For recent change I said the use of ADR. The extended response was easy on evaluation of jury and role of VLRC. For Q10 on the division of law-making powers was that the Franklin dams case, that’s what I put and explained high court role in state disputes. Other than that quiet easy. just took longer.
T | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
How much did people write for the last question?
Tony | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
@zafaraaaa
the 10 mark question I’m prety sure just reuqires a disussion of the role of the VLRC, so talk about how they research, consult experts, take in public submissions etc. to make recommendations… (maybe include an example, such as abortion laws in 2008)and also with the jury system all you had to do was evaluate it, so probably 4 s and 4 w
Hash | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
How was the question about the role of the judge in the adversay system of trial worth 5 marks?! What did people write for that question?
I think this year’s paper was the first paper in a while to not have asked students to compare the Australian constitution with another country’s!
mai | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
for the precedent question what you were meant to write is that the precedent is binding and the flexibility in precedent which distinguishing disapproving overruling and you could of wrote reversing but not needed for the division of power question did anyone write that the high is used?
Issa | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Easy exam, for the last I listed 3 strengths and weaknesses did we need 4?
Hash | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
For the precedent question i didn’t write about distinguishing, because the question asked about cases with similar facts.
What did people say for one way the division of power can be shifted? i wrote about referendums, and because it was worth 5 marks, used a case study too.
yo | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
It was an ok exam like i can’t complain, but there was just a few areas that i didnt study enough such as recent change and civil pre trial preocedures effectiveness- i just blabbed on about nothing. and the 10 mark question was a bit weird a si felt weird just randomly plotting in the role of the VLRC lol.. like it didnt flow- did any one else find that? and around how many pages did everyone write for the last question?
K | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
@Hash, i wrote referral of powers. Could that be right too?
2 | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
i agree, i also found it quite weird how there was no questions on any cases about high court interpretations, or the protection of rights of another countr
Tony | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
….did we have to exaplin the role of the judge explicitly? because I just basically explained the s and w of it with the role basically incoperated in that discussion?
Hi | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Guys omg – I didn’t traditionally EVALUATE the jury system – BUT I did but 4 strengths and 4 weaknesses, 4 strengths in a row then 4 weaknesses in a row. Would that be evidence of showing 2 sides of an argument? Will I lose lots of marks for not evaluating the last q omg
PLEASE someone answer
hehehe | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
What did everyone include for the referendum / High Court question?
i wasnt sure if you needed to evalate..
snsd | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Yeahh, it was ok apart from the recent change in law
I wasn’t thinking right, and everything I studied straight down the drain.
I’m pretty disappointed- but can’t complain
hehehe | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
i think its fine to do 4 stengths and then 4 weaknesses… its mroe abotu content not the composition of your piece
timebotheredme | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Hey guys,
So just a few questions
Did anyone else struggle with time? Also for the 10 marks question was it required 5s &5w because I only put 3 of each.
d | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
yo.. i agree with u. i dont understand why the role of the vlrc was put in the last question… overall well written exam tho
Tony | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
@timebotheredme with the 10 mark question given that you neeeded to describe the role of the VLRC (probably 2 marks) and then that leaves 8 marks in which 3 s and 3w would usually be the minimum required so your answer should be absolutely fine
Liv | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Hey you did evaluate it so don’t worry. My teacher is an examiner and someone asked her after the exam and she said it was fine. You should score highly on that question
Mo | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Extremelly different to the 2010 paper. Some pretty ambigous questions but it was a fair paper.
Lisa | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
yeah, i also found the “role of the judge” question stupid. have we really learnt THAT much on it to be worth 5 marks? ._. hahah.. i just wrote a whole bunch of stuff as well =/
i was definitely expecting more protection of rights comparison there though. it was on the paper for so many years in a row.. this year they increased the whole area but didn’t put anything about it on the exam for once? hm.. haha
bac | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
did you have to talk about referral of powers in one of the questions?
The exam was diffently hard comparing it to the previous years
Anyone else agree?
john | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
did we have to talk about the strengths and weakness of VLRC in the last questions aswell the jurys S and W??
Exam was difdently hard and different!!!
Mo | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
@Lisa yeah I found that a weird question as well, lol those examiners are a cheeky bunch! They did not put a comparison between Aus and another country this year. So many people including myself were expecting that to be in this years paper lol.
pew | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Easiest exam ever! If you didn’t get full marks you’re an idiot!
The last question required two separate responses… the role of the VLRC (2 marks) and 8 marks for the response to the juries… so if you gave 3s/3w that corresponded plus 2 extra strengths or weaknesses and made a statement saying whether you agree or not you’re getting full marks… depending if people did more or not.
it wasn’t just about the points, you have to answer the question and structure it… and write more info and more clearly than others as it is marked subjectively.
NicholasBond | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
I failed… that was terrible! like poo in a bum!
did anyone else say that the difference between exclusive and residual powers is that exclusive are for the commonwealth and the states whilst residual is for the courts?
Tony | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
@bac yes you could’ve talked about the referral of powers for the altering the division of powers question, but you didn’t have too, you could’ve choosen the process outlined in s.128 (ie. the referedum) or high court interpretation
And yes I’d agree that the exam was hard… seems to be a trend, the exam seems to be very hard every 2 years, the 2007 exam was hard and the 2009 was hard whereas the 2008 and 2010 exams were a walk in the park
Emily | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Did anyone write how a precedent can also be persuasive?
Stanley | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
what did people do for that question about judges being limited by precendent?
ria | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
for the precedent Q, i just said what it is, and strength and weakness related to it. is that right??
tarp | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
nah vcat isnt recent (has to be in the last 5 years)
Emily | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
I really had no idea how they wanted me to answer it so I pretty much said what a binding precedent was and what a persuasive precedent was. Do you reckon I’ll lose many marks for not talking about flexibility and reversing?
A | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
Was the division of law making powers talking about the Tasmanian dams case? What did others write?
tarp | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
what did people write for the effective access (civil pre-trial procedures) question??
Daniel | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
The referral of powers could be used as another way the division of law-making powers can be alerted. You didn’t have to write about a referendum!
Also with the precedent question, you needed to refer to the stimulus material – that is, the precedent was set in the Supreme Court therefore it was binding on the County and Magistrates’ Court.
Overall, the exam was quite straight forward. It’s a great shame it didn’t test more knowledge though.
The hardest question was the civil pre-trial procedures and how they affected effective access. The VCAT/courts comparision was also challenging. Just needed to name how the two differences were rules of evidence and procedure and the need for legal representation. The similarity was that the outcome is legally binding.
I hope everyone disagreed with the individual’s statement about the jury system!
hb | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
i personally found the exam ok.. and for the last question i did 5 strengths and 5 weaknesses as well as the role of VLRC, this was 4 pages of writing.
however the rest of the questions were straight forward…this may be because our teacher was AMAZING
Maria | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
For the jury Q I did an intro x2 s&w , and a conclusion and a support paragraph, reckon I needed more info?
Hash | Nov 15, 2011 | Reply
How do civil pre-trial procedures ensure effective access to the legal system? :/
2 | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
what would an A be.. out of 70?
reen | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
yea mai you got all the important things down for the precedent question. i used the High Court as the division of powers thing. I found i couldnt write much though so i chucked in the example of the Franklim Dam case.
vcaa assessor | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
A+ range will be at most 85%.
Maria | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
They have tie in with fair and unbiased hearing , timely resolution , effective acess. to bad I was so nervous that I forgot how the stuff I learnt !
emmytee | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
I thought it was really easy. I was dissapointed that they didnt test us on any cases though and the entire section about comparing constitutions with another country was left out?????
Overall i was really happy, except 70 marks in 2 hours and 15 minutes is too much. I was so pressured for time.
d | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
daniel, what stimulus material are u talking abt? i swear i didnt see any?
jess | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
ahh crap i only wrote differences between tribunals and courts. i did about 5 and then wrote about mediation. how many marks would i get for that question:(
mary | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
for the extend of judges to follow decisions or whatever the question was.. i wrote about binding precedent then persuasive how its only infleuntial and then judges only ability to make laws is through statutory interpreation and awaiting a test case to arise without a binding decision and the more superior you are in the court the more decisions you can make. am i right??
sarah | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
did you have to evaluate the last question!!!? i though it said agree ofr disagree?i fully agreed with the jury system not being outdated how it acts as a buffer between states and indiciuals, cross section of community, unbiased decisions, has no knowledge of witness or parties, and included alternative reforms , professional jurors, specialised and trial by jury to make the effictness improve a whole lot more . and then wrote about role of vlrc. did i do it right?
hedgie | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
thought it wasn’t too hard provided that the examiner doesn’t mark too hard. I had enough points for each one (and examples, explanations etc.) but some of my points were a bit…meh.
For example: for the precedent question I said that a judge, while not strictly bound to follow the precedent, may decide to anyway as it is persuasive and they want to uphold consistency and certainty in legal outcomes. Not the best point, but I hope I get the mark for it…
Someone | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
It was hard and weird. Its so ambiguous ):
Also, its quite long aswell, Compared to other years
student | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
do you think that to get a 40 you would only need 85%? was it meant to be a hard exam?
meh | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
the question asking for compare vcat over courts, was like more of a strength weakness thing, same thing as similarites and differences, for the jury question, u must of stated the role of VLRC and 4 strengths and 4 weaknesses and ur position in the argument. For the precedent question they are bound to follow new precedents. you could of talked about how parliament can override precedents and they must wait for a case to arise. You also had to talk how they are not bound, so they can avoid through overuling etc. (note. you must breifly explain the 4 ways of avoiding precdent). Another way is that they are not bound is when there is a persuasive precedent.
Nathan | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
the exam questions were good, but were we required to use case studies and examples? the mark allocation was strange and now I’m stressing because I didnt use case study examples!
Emily | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
Do you reckon if I talked about 3 strengths and 3 weaknesses the role of the vlrc and a reform that could have been included that I should be covered for the 10 marks. I guess its more about the quality not the quantity of what you write.
sarah | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
it didnt say evaluate though the last question. didnt it say do you disagree or agree? discuss?
so there was no need for both sides.
avicii | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
@ sarah, discuss means present both sides.
j | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
avicii: discuss means that you can present just one side. As is often said, a more able student will present both sides and explain the extent to which they agree. They will probably be marked better. But it is not required
emmytee | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
actually discuss means present both sides.
sarah | Nov 16, 2011 | Reply
wooo! so i still have a chance for a decent mark with that question!, because i was happy with what i wrote
Issa | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
Discuss means present both sides of an argument, if you didn’t know that you have a terrible teacher or don’t pay attention.
Casy | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
Did anyone find the exam EASY, but really AMBIGUOUS? like in past exams, you know the mark allocation but for this exam it’s really unclear if you’re answering the question properly? I think there was many ways to answering the precedent question..
j | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
emmytee: I never said it didn’t
You *can* present one side. A more able student will explain the extent to which they agree, present both sides and evaluate. However, there are still a few marks to gain if you only present and discuss one side of the argument.
j | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
emmytee: I meant not required to get at least a few marks. (should have been clearer >.<)
j | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
Issa: I know that. My point was that there are still marks to gain by presenting one side well
By presenting a detailed discussion of one side you can theoretically get up to half the marks allocated to the question, as you have done half of what the question required. I was not very clear in that when I first said it.
Casy: Definitely more ambiguous. That especially wasn’t helpful as the new exam was out of seventy rather than sixty. It made those ambiguous questions slightly harder with the extra time pressures.
jess | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
last years exam was sooooo much easier than this one!
this exam was so hard to distinguish what the examiners were actually looling for in an answer, also I didn’t get enough to answer the 8 mark question. should have had more time considering there was 10 additional marks as apposed to last year.
Tony | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
when they changed the study design did they actualy change the whole marking scheme??
em | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
@jess: that was apparently their point. One of the examiners at a lecture told us that most teachers taught “2 minutes per mark” and they were not liking it, especially for 1, 2 and 3 mark questions. I think there should have been more smaller questions on there, since it’s the first year doing that.
Joel | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
Tribunals aren’t a recent change, if you wrote that you will be marked incorrect for the question as recent change refers to past five years or so. VCAT was introduced over 10 years ago now. Also what was the question on precedents exactly does anyone know it word for word?
emmytee | Nov 17, 2011 | Reply
@ sarah
including reforms and alternatives to the jury system in the last question was unessecary as the question did not ask for that and marks will not be allocated for discussion of reforms and alternatives.
a more advanced answer would have given 4 advantages of the jury system, with 4 disadvantages that are relevant to the advantages. Providing they were correct this would get you 8 marks.
Describing the role of the VLRC would then gain you the 2 extra allocated marks.
Kieren | Nov 19, 2011 | Reply
I agree with you somewhat, however, if the statement said “the jury system is outdated and should be abolished”, wouldn’t it be appropriate to include reasons as to why it is outdated and how to counteract this, or even to include some alternatives as to what would happen if the current jury system was “abolished”?
billy | Nov 19, 2011 | Reply
was just wondering how much i roughly need out of 70 to score a 40 study score?
D | Nov 20, 2011 | Reply
@ kieran, I do believe you’d receive marks due to the word ‘abolish’. However, if you read 2010′s exam there was a STARKLY similar question stating ‘do you support the RETENTION of juries in vic’? It was almost the exact same question and it was noted that only strengths and weaknesses was needed, and reforms were irrelevant receiving no marks (assessors report). Probably similar to this question, but I guess ‘abolish’ could have a different context to ‘retention’.. but if you agreed to an extent it’s likely that they’ll accept an evaluation.
Daniel | Nov 20, 2011 | Reply
@Billy, it all depends, but 58-60 should be a low A+. That will get you at least a 40, I would imagine.
calem | Nov 20, 2011 | Reply
Emmytee, would it be fair to say that through the mention of VLRC that they implied that an alternative/reform was neccesary for full marks?
4 strengths/weaknesses is a bit much, and it would make more sense for 1 mark intro, 1 mark structure, 1 mark role of juries, 3 marks str/weakness,2 marks role of VLRC, 1 marks alternative/reform as a result fo vcat, 1 mark conlucion/oppinion.
Kieren | Nov 21, 2011 | Reply
@D, thankyou for the comment, i’d probably have to say i agree seeing that previous exam question, but i’m not too fussed, as i based the majority of the essay on reasons why or why not the jury system is outdated, only including one reform and one alternative to strengthen the essay, but i’ll just have to wait and see how it went i guess :p
Matt | Nov 23, 2011 | Reply
guys, the last question requires no set structure. unless specified on the required amounts of strengths and weaknesses required, or a description of a method or place, THE 10 MARK QUESTION WILL BE MARKED GLOBALLY.
BT | Dec 16, 2011 | Reply
The exam was okay…it was quite hard and especially within the small time frame it is hard to write everyhting down in your head. However I thought I did good but results came in today and not as happy as could be!
ToNy | Dec 16, 2011 | Reply
42
d | Dec 17, 2011 | Reply
How’d you guys go?
I got a 46! triple A+’s
ToNy | Dec 17, 2011 | Reply
anyone know when we can get our statement of marks?
avicii | Dec 17, 2011 | Reply
48
Bee | Dec 18, 2011 | Reply
44! yay (: but now I’m sad there will be no more Legal or my amazing teacher.
A.MeeVee | Dec 18, 2011 | Reply
The exam wasn’t extremely difficult, all questions were answerable it was just that it took some time to fully understand what they were saying and how we should respond because they were a little vague. I am ecstatic with my results, considering how I felt when I walked out of that exam! I got a 42
All A*’s 
Hope everyone did well!
Doris | Jan 11, 2012 | Reply
i need some help with mt chinese lote . i am vce student .my e-mail is doris220_220hotmail.com.please ,if someone can help me , connect with me
JohnJ | Jan 15, 2012 | Reply
I did the common law and equity and juries, it went ok i dont think part b of any of the questions went too well