LAW
sam sam
LAW112Asses.4.docxback to top
Value: 40%
Due Date: 29-Jan-2021
Return Date: 26-Feb-2021
Length: 1500 words EXCL references
Group Assessment: No
Submission method options: EASTS (online)
TASK
You are a lawyer who has been asked to research and prepare a legal memorandum on the implications of a recent decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Decisions Tribunal: DRJ v Commissioner of Victims Rights; DRK v Commissioner of Victims Rights; DRM v Commissioner of Victims Rights; DRN v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2019] NSWCATAD 195. This case involved statutory interpretation of the expression “act of violence” within the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 (NSW) and a jurisdictional threshold to determine whether the applicants were entitled to access the Victims Support Scheme in New South Wales.
Task
Locate the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal judgment, then draft a memorandum which outlines the key aspects of statutory interpretation that the case involved. In your memo, address the following:
1. Outline the relevant legal issue(s) in dispute (200 words maximum);
2. Categorise and critically analyse the interpretive criteria applied by Deputy President Cole (900 words);
3. In your own words, explain the conclusion reached by the Tribunal (150 words);
4. In your opinion, would the outcome have differed if the applicants had been kidnapped from New South Wales, or if the offender lived in New South Wales when the case was determined? Give reasons for your answer (250 words).
Structure - your memorandum should contain the following components:
1. Relevant legal issues
2. Interpretative criteria applied by Deputy President Cole
3. Conclusion of the Tribunal
4. Critical commentary
You must use appropriate references by way of footnotes and a bibliography in accordance with AGLC4 referencing.
Task Support:
Task Exemplar – a sample of appropriate work for this task (register, format etc.) will be available under the Assessment item on Interact 2.
Online Workshop – a targeted online meeting will be conducted to assist in preparation for this task. Attendance is highly recommended.
RATIONALE
SUBJECT LEARNING OUTCOMES
This assessment task will assess the following learning outcome/s:
· be able to plan and apply effective strategies in legal research of case law and legislation based scenarios.
· be able to identify and explain the facts pertaining to cases and ratio decided within the Australian judicial system.
· be able to interpret statutes and common law and identify legal problems in scenarios and cases.
· be able to present persuasive and informed arguments based on leading precedents.
GRADUATE LEARNING OUTCOMES
This task also contributes to the assessment of the following CSU Graduate Learning Outcome/s :
· Academic Literacy and Numeracy (Skill) - CSU Graduates demonstrate the literacy and numeracy skills necessary to understand and interpret information and communicate effectively according to the context.
· Information and Research Literacies (Knowledge) - CSU Graduates demonstrate that disciplinary knowledge is developed through research and evidence.
· Professional Practice (Knowledge) - CSU Graduates possess the knowledge and understanding of the discipline and the nature of professionalism required for the given profession or discipline in contemporary societies.
MARKING CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
|
Statutory Interpretation Task: marking criteria & standards of performance |
|||||
|
Criteria |
High Distinction (85+)
|
Distinction (75-84%)
|
Credit (65-74%)
|
Pass (50-64%)
|
Fail (<50%)
|
|
Identification of relevant legal issues (15%) Identifies the legal issues relevant to the case and accurately outlines the grounds of appeal
|
Comprehensively identifies the major and minor legal issues explored in the judgment/s. These are outlined with precision. |
Accurately identifies the major and minor legal issues and outlines them with precision.
|
Accurately identifies and outlines most but not all major legal issues.
|
Accurately identifies and outlines some legal issues and outlines them correctly.
|
Does not accurately identify any relevant legal issues or only a few of them. Legal issues are not clearly outlined.
|
|
Analysis of interpretative criteria (statutory interpretation) (20%)
|
Accurate, complete and sophisticated analysis of interpretive criteria. Analysis includes a critique of which interpretive criteria are not applied in the judgment. |
Accurate and complete analysis of interpretive criteria. Analysis identifies which interpretive criteria are not applied in the judgment.
|
The discussion analyses most of the interpretive criteria and accurately classifies intrinsic and extrinsic materials.
|
The discussion analyses some of the relevant interpretive criteria applied in the judgment and accurately classifies intrinsic and extrinsic materials.
|
The discussion does not analyse relevant interpretive criteria or accurately classify intrinsic and extrinsic materials.
|
|
Conclusion (15%) Identification of ratio decidendi and explanation of the conclusion reached
|
The ratio decidendi is accurately identified and the conclusion explains concisely how the legal issues are resolved with reference to the facts of the case.
|
The ratio decidendi is accurately identified and the conclusion explains how the legal issues are resolved with some reference to the facts of the case.
|
The ratio decidendi is identified and the conclusion explains how the legal issues are resolved but with no reference to the facts of the case.
|
The ratio decidendi is identified and the conclusion explains in basic terms how the legal issues are resolved.
|
The ratio decidendi is not identified or the conclusion does not explain how the legal issues are resolved.
|
|
Reflection (15%) Interpretation and application of statute
|
Accurately and succinctly interprets statutes and common law. Consistently presents novel, persuasive and informed arguments based on leading precedents and extensive research.
|
Effectively interprets statutes and common law. Consistently presents persuasive and informed arguments based on leading precedents and research.
|
Effectively interprets statutes and common law. Presents persuasive and informed arguments based on leading precedents.
|
Interprets statutes and common law. Presents persuasive and informed arguments based on leading precedents.
|
Does not interpret statutes and common law. Arguments are unconvincing, unclear or uninformed.
|
|
Language and presentation of paper (20%)
|
Uses legal language appropriately and with faultless grammar and spelling. Presentation follows guidelines, appears professional and demonstrates attention to detail.
|
Uses clear and fluent language with accurate grammar and spelling. Presentation follows guidelines and appears professional.
|
Uses clear language with accurate grammar and spelling notwithstanding some errors. Presentation follows guidelines.
|
Uses understandable language, notwithstanding some grammar and/or spelling errors. Presentation mostly follows guidelines.
|
Language is frequently unclear, inappropriate in tone and/or there are numerous grammar or spelling errors. Presentation fails to adhere to guidelines. |
|
Referencing (15%)
|
Cites and references comprehensively, demonstrates academic integrity, and complies fully with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing conventions. |
Cites and references accurately and complies with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing conventions. Fewer than three minor errors or omissions which do not impact on the acknowledgment and traceability of the source material, or the demonstration of academic integrity.
|
Cites and references in compliance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing. Up to eight minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, underlining) do not impact the acknowledgment or traceability of source material, or the demonstration of academic integrity. |
Cites and references consistently, but lacking compliance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing. Frequent minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, underlining) do not impact the acknowledgment or traceability of source material, or the demonstration of academic integrity. |
Citations and references are inconsistent or do not comply with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing.
|
PRESENTATION
Set out your memorandum using the exemplar found under the Assessment item in Interact2. Attach a Centre for Law and Justice coversheet and bibliography in AGLC4 format.
