legal studies = mumbo jumbo??? (1 Viewer)

[shikaree_bex]

How much is legal studies a bitch?
I mean different textbooks say different things, it's chaging so often that we have to learn from the media, our teachers (mine anyway) try try to explain cocepts that they dont even understand themselves....

It all seems a bit waffly to me

it seems as long as you refer to cases, media reports, docs, leg, and give and int perspective you'll be okay BUT where the hell are u meant to get all these things for like, each stupid little topic of legal studies

DOn't get me wrong it's hell interesting...but...frustrates me sometime, just stressed cos haven't started studying for it,

WHY OH WHY DID I DO LEGAL!!!


:jaw:

 

[sirloki]

agreeeeeeeeeeeee

legal is the most mundane and akward subject of the lot i reckon. It's content is absurd and yet it doesnt seem to have scaled anygood last year i would have givin it the arse and done 4 unit english to make up 10 units in retrospect

ah well worrying is as good as trying to solve algebra by chewing bubblegum

 

[homeboyjoe]

thats true i would have thought that legal studies whould have been scaled more, but most questions that are asked in the HSC are generalised and simple question in my understanding.

 

[Christine]

I actually find legal really inrteresting and not that hard....

media articles and legislation are easy - read the paper

the exam shouldn't be too hard - all u have to do is talk about straightforward facts and then evaluate evaluate and evaluate (for all u critics out there this should be easy!!)

good luck pples

 

[Brookie-iluvmat]

I'm doing my HSC this year and i fouond legal really interesting for the prelim course but this year its just so boring and not interesting me at all...:S

 

[wrong_turn]

how dare you say that?!!?! get out right now. or be prepared by my legal ray gun which shall zap you to smitherins!! blah...i was bored, and i have halfys next week..

 

[melsc]

I love legal but thats me...if u think legal changes alot do something like IPT where the technology is chaning daily

 

[Jonathan A]

How can people hate legal? lol

The law does change, but so does everything else. The law is not in a vaccuum, the reason it changes is because society around it changes as well. You and I are the ones who make it change.

Whilst changes are occurring in law, the principles are never radically changed, and baing legal studies students, you will not need to make very specific commentaries on law.

But I hear your concerns. If you study torts, and I know Melsc, being the wiz on case law, will notice it, for centuries lawyers have relied on the common law (that is precedents alone) to determine liabilities. The State Government recently imposed the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW). I can't stand this legislation, it caps people's claims something shocking and takes away certain important aspects of judicial discretion. Our problem in studying torts now is that NO case has tested or interpreted the Act. The reason is that people filing claims with the new provisions haven't had their case decided or heard yet. Another problem is current decisions are based on the law prior to the act.

So to study the Act we need to use policy papers and refer to the common law which MAY be correct, but in a court may very well be changed. How sad can governments get when they listen to insurance companies.

 

[santaslayer]

legal rocked....its bullshido all the way...

no need to study.....much..

 

[melsc]

I guess if u love the law like me u will love legal

 

[monique66]

i love legal, just make up stuff. that's all i do. You just use ur gk and apply it. Ahh...*relaxes*

 

[MoonlightSonata]

HThe State Government recently imposed the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW). I can't stand this legislation, it caps people's claims something shocking and takes away certain important aspects of judicial discretion. Our problem in studying torts now is that NO case has tested or interpreted the Act.

Well it is fairly certain that most of the provisions will be interpreted in line, as far as possible, with existing common law. Thus most of the cases are still very relevant. Much of the Act reaffirms certain decisions anyway.

 

[Jonathan A]

Well it is fairly certain that most of the provisions will be interpreted in line, as far as possible, with existing common law. Thus most of the cases are still very relevant. Much of the Act reaffirms certain decisions anyway.

I agree most of the Act mirrors the current common law, in fact to the extent where we would say that the Act modifies the common law. However the way it was imposed does show how the State Government rushed into it, without even waiting for the findings of the Ipp Report.

The Civil Liability Act doesn't sit comfortably with the law of torts either. As I stated above, it caps and limits certain liabilities that the common law would find, but are removed in the Act, many referring to criminals recovering and people who were acting negligently themselves (even though the common law in many ways dealt with this).