Help with Law and Society questions please? (1 Viewer)

[Insanity]

Hey guys, was just going through some practice questions which I got wrong and was wondering if anybody could explain to me why the correct answer is the correct answer?

The answer in bold is the correct answer, where the one in italics is the one I thought was correct.

Much thanks!

Bill is seeking compensation against his tenant, Steve, whom he claims caused $10 000 intentional damage to his property. This could be best described as which of the following types of law?
a) Property
b) Contract
c) Tort
d) Criminal


Which of the following is an important part of the idea of procedural fairness?
a) access to legal aid.
b) the ability to refer to case law
c) the right of a defendant to have bail
d) the right of a defendant to a hearing.


A government introduces laws which deliberately aim to discriminate and threaten a minority group within its borders. These laws could violate which of the following principles?
a) Natural law
b) Natural justice
c) Sovereignty
d) Statute Law

 

[melsc]

1. perhaps the word 'intentional' suggests it was a crime as it fulfils mens rea??? Remember that Property Offences are Economic CRIMINAL offences. No offence but that question is dodgy bcoz compensation suggests Civil Law... if he were to pay a fine then it would be criminal

2. procedural fairness, think back to Natural Justice (the bolded part is the most relevant)

Doctrine of Natural Justice
It is a firmly established principle of Aust. law that no person should be condemned or
unheard. It is this opportunity to be heard that is subject to the rules of natural justice. It is founded in the notion that logical reasoning may allow the determination of just or fair processes in legal proceedings and includes the notion of procedural fairness.

3 principles of procedural fairness are:
THE HEARING RULE requires a decision-maker to give a person whose interests will be adversely affected by the decision, an opportunity to be heard
THE BIAS RULE requires a decision-maker to be distributed or unbiased in the matter to be decided
THE NO-EVIDENCE RULE which has been developed comparatively recently requires that a decision be based upon…evidence…
It includes the following:
 A person accused of a crime should be given adequate notice about the proceedings/charges.
 A person making the decision should declare any personal interest in the proceedings
 The decision maker should be unbiased and act in good faith
 Proceedings should be conducted fairly to both parties.
 Each party has the right to hear the other side’s arguments to the decision maker.
 Each party is entitled to ask questions and contradict the evidence of the opposing party.
 A decision maker should not take into account irrelevant considerations but should take into account relevant considerations.
 Not only should just be done but it should be seen to be done.

3. I'm not too sure about the next one...need to check

 

[aaaman]

where were these questions from??? i think their fucked

 

[melsc]

question 2 is aight but 1 is stuffed

 

[Insanity]

Yeah, question 1 is a bit dodge ... like you said, melsc, 'criminal' might have something to do with the intentional part of the question, but the compensation part stuffs it up so ..yeah ..

Thanks for question 2 melsc - it really helped me. While you're on a roll , would you mind explaining the difference between the rule of law, natural justice and natural law? [Of course, you don't have to if you don't want to ... ]

Natural law which is created by a higher being. Natural justice is to do with how the law is interpreted, natural law implies that there is something from a higher deity.

But then ... wouldn't the government be seen as a 'higher being'? So how would the government be doing that violate natural law? Cause I always thought as natural law being law made on the basis of what is natural to be "right", like it's law based on what's obvious being the right thing to do.

aaaman - they're from my trial paper

 

[melsc]

wat the hell was ur trial paper??? ur questions suck...we had the independant paper a few were weird but not like urs...question 1 is sooo wrong LOL its a contradiction "intention" and "compensaion"

rule of law is that no one is above the law, the law is applicable to all and that the govt should not abuse its power, natural law is the law made by higher reasoning and natural justice is all the stuff I pasted before about fairness of trials blah blah blah hope that helps

for 3 the govt isnt seen as a higher being in terms of natural law

 

[Jonathan A]

1. perhaps the word 'intentional' suggests it was a crime as it fulfils mens rea??? Remember that Property Offences are Economic CRIMINAL offences. No offence but that question is dodgy bcoz compensation suggests Civil Law... if he were to pay a fine then it would be criminal

It is probably Tort. You can recover in Trespass to Land. Trespass is an INTENTIONAL tort. Penalties are to the state and hence criminal. You could argue Victims Services (compensation or orders by the court), however these are rare and not in the traditional course of criminal law.

 

[melsc]

^ thats why the questions are so stupid

 

[Insanity]

Are you sure that you are writing/reading the questions correctly?

Yes, 100% sure.

Meslc - thanks! And my paper was the S.G.H.S one.

 

[still waiting]

But then ... wouldn't the government be seen as a 'higher being'? So how would the government be doing that violate natural law? Cause I always thought as natural law being law made on the basis of what is natural to be "right", like it's law based on what's obvious being the right thing to do.

im not sure if you still need this but natural law is what was considered to be god made law, thats the higher being, the governement then goes against gods wishes and therefore is violating them,
natural justice is how the laws and legislations are interpreted and put into place,
anyways i hope this helps if you need it

 

[Insanity]

im not sure if you still need this but natural law is what was considered to be god made law, thats the higher being, the governement then goes against gods wishes and therefore is violating them,
natural justice is how the laws and legislations are interpreted and put into place,
anyways i hope this helps if you need it

Hey thanks for that, it did help a bit