BLB1101 Australian Legal System in Context

BLB1101 Australian Legal System in Context

ASSESSMENT 2: RESEARCH ASSIGNMENT

There are two parts to this Assignment a Case Summary and Essay

Due Date Part A Case Summary & Part B Essay

Both parts are due on the Monday of Week 3 by 11.59pm

Word Count Total 1500 words (Part A 500 words and Part B 1000 words)- (excluding footnotes and bibliography) and a 10% leeway applies to this assessment.

Weighting of Assessment Task 30% of total marks for the unit

Submission requirements Submit electronic copy Assessment 2 dropbox link on units VU Collaborate space). (Also read this Unit of Study Guide and the coversheet for warnings regarding collusion and plagiarism and information about avoiding those behaviours.)

Late penalty 5% per day including any weekend days and public holidays. Where there is any question about time of submission, the timing of the online submission will be used provided the file uploaded is in a format readable by the examiner and the online marking system. Please note that the dropbox will close 3 days after the due date at 5pm on Thursday Week 3 and no submissions after this time will be marked

Referencing requirements AGLC4 compliant footnotes and an AGLC compliant bibliography must be included.

Presentation requirements Font: Size 12 font New Times Roman

Include a bibliography (Remember you need to also use footnotes). You can submit one bibliography for both parts of the assignment.

Title page: Your assignment should have a title page with your full name, student ID, Total Word Count and Name of Lecturer and your Class)

PART A CASE SUMMARY (500 words)*

Write a case summary of the following one VCAT case as reported in Austlii (www.austlii.edu.au):

For students with VU ID nos ending 1,2, 3: Wainwright v Liousas (Residential Tenancies) [2022] VCAT 1179 (12 October 2022)

For students with VU ID nos ending 4, 5, 6: Ilagan v Hawkins (Residential Tenancies) [2022] VCAT 1209 (20 October 2022)

For students with VU ID nos ending in 7,8,9,0: AlEddeh v Director of Housing (Residential Tenancies) [2022] VCAT 1283 (7 November 2022)

Your answer to Part A should take the form of a case summary. (Additional information on this task and its requirements are provided below, plus some additional resources are provided on the units VU Collaborate space). Note the cases above are not AGLC Compliant and in your assignment you will need to present them in accordance with the AGLC rules.

Further guidance/clarifications regarding Part A

Form of Writing: The Case summaries must be written in the third person.

Subheadings: Use of sub-headings is expected as they add clarity for the reader and often provide direction for the writer. Modern legal writing commonly uses sub-headings, eg in case summaries, court judgments, letters of advice, articles and essays.

Descriptive writing or critical/analytical writing? Part A (case summary) requires reports summarising the background facts, central issues, the decision and the reasoning of the case.

Use of external sources: For Part A, research into relevant legislation is likely to be required to fill in gaps for comprehensive case summaries regarding the hearings (eg Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic), Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic), Australian Consumer Law;)

PART B VCAT ESSAY 1000 words*

You are required to write a short essay (1000 words).

Essay Question:

VCAT is an effective dispute resolution process. Do you agree with this statement?

Structure

Your essay must have an introduction, body and conclusion. In your essay state your contention, define key terms and set out your framework

Use sub-headings

Write in third person language

Research

You must conduct legal research

A Minimum of 4 secondary sources should be used (one should be a published law review article)

Additional primary sources would be useful.

Example of Student writing a critical analysis:

https://student.unsw.edu.au/critical-thinking*Total word limit for the essay is 1000 words excluding footnotes and bibliography. The word limit will be strictly applied.

Rubric

High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Underdeveloped Very Underdeveloped

PART A VCAT Case summary 1 (addressing requirements of the task) (25% marks) Reports on the allocated case in a succinct, logical and sophisticated way, citing relevant evidence to support summary statements; pays close attention to recounting and describing facts and legal issues; demonstrates meaningful insights; well-reasoned; findings reported are appropriately related to the allocated case.

Reports on the allocated case in a mostly succinct, logical and sophisticated way, citing relevant evidence to support summary statements; pays close attention to recounting and describing facts and legal issues; demonstrates some meaningful insights; well-reasoned; findings reported are mostly well related to the allocated case. Acceptable description of facts and issues of allocated case; evidence used from the case report is mostly relevant but may occasionally used without demonstrated understanding and/or consistency. Alternatively/additionally, there are occasional gaps in reasoning; occasionally demonstrates a lack of balance in the way on which the material within the VCAT case is relied. Findings are generally competent but may have occasional flaws or inconsistencies in the way they are explained to the reader. Acceptable description of facts and issues of allocated case; evidence used is mostly relevant but may not always be used with understanding and consistency. Alternatively/additionally there are significant gaps in reasoning reported; evidences a lack of balance in the way on which material provided the VCAT allocated case. Findings are generally competent but may have some significant flaws and inconsistencies in the way they are explained to the reader. Fails to show real understanding of the allocated case; lack of clarity and focus evident in description of case facts and/or issues; arguments and use of evidence are poorly expressed, hard to follow and/or lack conviction; report relies on unsubstantiated claims and/or demonstrates a lack of balance and consistency; major elements are missing. Fails to show real understanding of the allocated case; lack of clarity and focus evident in description of case facts and issues; arguments and use of evidence are very poorly expressed, hard to follow and lack conviction. Additionally or alternatively, submission relies excessively on direct quotes from the source case rather than summarising in students' words and/or relies heavily on unsubstantiated claims and/or demonstrates a lack of balance and consistency; major elements are missing.

Demonstrates contextual awareness and uses research sources to fill any gaps in law used in the hearing (5% marks) Uses research skills well to appropriately fill most gaps in the case allocated regarding jurisdiction and the law used in the tribunals reasoning. Uses research skills fill most gaps in the case allocated regarding jurisdiction and the law used in the tribunals reasoning, may have occasional gaps. Demonstrates some attempt to use research skills to fill gapsin thecase allocated, regarding jurisdiction and/or the law used in the tribunals reasoning, but leaves a significant gap or may cite some inappropriate law. Demonstrates an attempt to use research skills to fill gapsin thecase allocated regarding jurisdiction and/or the law used in the tribunals reasoning, just at an acceptable standard. may have significant gaps Demonstrates some attempt to use research skills to fill gaps in thecase report regarding jurisdiction and/or the law used in the tribunals reasoning, but cites only inappropriate law. Relies mostly on information supplied in the case allocated and very little attempt to use research skills to fill gaps in thecase allocated or the law used in the tribunals reasoning.

PART B Addressing the essay question (30% marks) Analyses the critical reflection topic in a succinct, logical and sophisticated way, articulating in-depth personalised ideas and perspectives and citing relevant evidence to support views expressed; demonstrates meaningful insights; well-reasoned; achieves balance in the way sources are used; findings are well related to the evidence; Analyses the critical reflection topic in a mostly succinct and logical way, articulating in-depth personalised ideas and perspectives and citing relevant evidence to support views expressed; demonstrates some meaningful insights; mostly well-reasoned; largely achieves balance in the way sources are used; findings are mostly well-related to the evidence. Analyses the critical reflection topic competently, acknowledging different sides of the issues, including own perspective; evidence used is mostly relevant but may occasionally be used with misunderstanding or consistency; there are occasional gaps in reasoning; may occasionally demonstrate a lack of balance in the way sources are relied on; findings are competent but may have some flaws or inconsistencies. Analyses the critical reflection topic adequately, acknowledging different sides of the issue/s, including some own perspective; evidence used is mostly relevant but not always used with understanding and consistency; there are several or significant gaps in reasoning; evidences a lack of balance in the way sources are relied on; findings are generally competent but may have several flaws or inconsistencies. Fails to show real understanding of the critical reflection topic; presents only one side of the issue; hard to follow and lacks conviction; report relies on unsubstantiated claims and/or demonstrates a lack of balance and consistency; major elements are missing. Fails to show understanding of the critical reflection; presents only one side of the issue; very hard to follow and lacks conviction; report relies on unsubstantiated claims and/or demonstrates a lack of balance and consistency; major elements are missing.

Legal Research (15% marks) Demonstrates excellent legal research skills in context by using sources in a mature and strongly persuasive discussion of the topic; chooses appropriate and relevant authorities and sources and links them to the topic and each other in a mature and considered way, explaining exactly how and why each source contributes to the discussion. Demonstrates strong legal research skills in context by using sources in a mature and persuasive discussion of the topic; chooses appropriate and relevant authorities and sources and frequently (but perhaps not always) links them to topic and each other in a largely considered way, explaining how and why each source contributes to the discussion. Demonstrates legal research skills that are at an acceptable level fora foundation law unitand that utilise appropriate sources in a competent discussion of the topic. Alternatively/additionally, writer occasionally does not clearly explain how or why some sources cited are relevant.

Demonstrates legal research skills that are just at an acceptable level for this stage of the block in a foundation law unit and utilises some appropriate sources in a just-competent discussion of the topic; writer might not clearly explain how and why the sources cited are relevant. Does not demonstrate satisfactory legal research skills in choice of sources or in the way that they are utilised in discussion of the topic. A tendency to rely on personal opinion, with writing inadequately supported by reference to appropriate sources.

Demonstrates poor legal research skills in choice of sources or in the way that they are utilised in discussion of the topic. A strong tendency to rely totally on personal opinion, with writing unsupported by reference to appropriate sources.

GLOBAL MATTERS ACROSS PART A AND PART B Demonstrating legal literacy skills through use of appropriate language, structure and style: (10% marks) Writes in error-free, clearly structured (including use of sub-headings) and well-phrased language, appropriate to a legal context and the type of task involved, that gets the message across accurately and proficiently, includingconsistent use of third person form.

Writes generally in error-free, clearly structured (including use of sub-headings)and well-phrased language, appropriate to a legal context and the types of task involved, that gets the message across accurately and proficiently, but with occasional patches where clarity, language and/or use of third person form can be improved. Writes in mostly correct and proficient language with some strengths evidenced in structure and phrasing suitable for a legal context. Additionally or alternatively, some defects occur in clarity of meaning, level of formality, use of third person, use of sub-headings and/or readability, leaving the writers messages being a little difficult to follow at some points.

Writes generally in proficient language with generally acceptable structure and phrasing largely suitable for a legal context. Additionally or alternatively, significant number of defects occur in clarity of meaning, level of formality, use of third party form, use of sub-headings and/or readability, which disrupt the readability/clarity/flow of the work for the reader. Writes in underdeveloped or inappropriately informal, poorly structured (including lack of sub-headings) and/or poorly-phrased language. Meaning is often unclear; work is often hard to understand. Fails to achieve an acceptable level of written expression for a legal context.

Writes in significantly underdeveloped or inappropriately informal, poorly structured (including lack of sub-headings) and/or badly-phrased language. Meaning is very often unclear and/or very often hard to understand. Fails to achieve an acceptable level of written expression for a legal context.

Applying AGLC correctly, including footnotes and bibliography: (10% marks) Applies AGLC correctly throughout, including in footnotes and bibliography.

Applies AGLC throughout with only occasional minor errors, including in footnotes and bibliography.

Generally applies AGLC largely correctly, but with several minor errors, including in footnotes orbibliography.

Generally applies AGLC correctly, but with some significant errors and lapses, including in footnotes and/or bibliography.

Shows some severe deficiencies in AGLC usage and application, including in footnotes and bibliography or alternatively submission was originally missing bibliography.

Shows several severe deficiencies in AGLC usage and application, including in footnotes and bibliography.

Compliance with word limit (including 10% tolerance). (Note: minor excess is assessed here, but for major excess submissions will not be marked beyond 1800 words): (5% marks) Submission does not exceed the word limit (with its inbuilt 10% tolerance), ie does not exceed 1650 words. Has complied with word limit for one part of the assignment (Part A or Part B) and has not submitted the other part or exceeded the word limit for the other part. Overly excessive in length (exceeds 1800 words.)

(Note:in addition, the contents of the submission have not been marked beyond 1800 words).