Lecture notes for law PDF

Preview

Summary

random, lecture notes, weeks 3-8, short...

Description

LLB107 Statutory Interpretation – Semester 2, 2021 Letter of Advice (40%) Criterion Referenced Assessment Sheet Criteria

Excellent

Very Good

7 (High Distinction) Criterion 1: Problem solving, analysis and reasoning (30 marks) Ability to analyse a problem, identify relevant legal issues and apply the correct legal principles to provide accurate and practical legal advice.

•

You identified all relevant legal issues and statutory provisions.

•

You correctly applied all relevant rules and principles of statutory interpretation to analyse and interpret statutory provisions.

•

You correctly applied relevant cases and/or statutory provisions to reach correct conclusions and provide accurate and practical advice.

Good

6 (Distinction)

Sound

5 (Credit)

4 (Pass)

•

You identified almost all relevant legal issues.

•

You identified the majority of the relevant legal issues.

•

You identified some of the relevant legal issues.

•

You correctly applied almost all relevant rules and principles of statutory interpretation to analyse and interpret statutory provisions.

•

You correctly applied many of the relevant rules and principles of statutory interpretation to analyse and interpret statutory provisions.

•

You applied some of the relevant rules and principles of statutory interpretation to analyse and interpret statutory provisions.

You correctly applied almost all relevant cases and/or statutory provisions to reach correct conclusions and provide appropriate advice.

•

•

1

You made a good attempt at applying many of the relevant cases and/or statutory provisions in order to reach sound conclusions and provide generally appropriate advice.

Inadequate

•

You made some attempt to apply relevant cases and/or statutory provisions but you did not always apply the legal principles correctly and/or your advice was not always accurate or practical.

3-0 (Fail) •

Your ability to recognise relevant legal issues was limited.

•

Limited or no application of relevant rules and principles of statutory interpretation to analyse and interpret statutory provisions.

•

Limited or no application of relevant rules and principles of statutory interpretation and cases and/or statutory provisions and the advice you provided was not accurate, or of limited utility.

Criterion 2: Effective communication in a realworld context (5 marks) Ability to effectively communicate legal concepts, arguments and counter arguments that concern solutions to legal problems. Compliance with written advice style.

•

You presented all the legal concepts and your advice clearly, concisely, in plain English and using a professional tone.

•

Your advice was well structured, including appropriate headings, and a clear conclusion.

•

Criterion 3: Legal citation and referencing (5 marks) Use of appropriate authorities to support your advice and appropriate legal citation.

Thorough proofreading is evident: spelling, grammar and punctuation are errorfree throughout.

•

You presented almost all the legal concepts and your advice clearly, concisely, in plain English and using a professional tone.

•

You presented the legal concepts and your advice clearly, but not always concisely or in plain English and using a professional tone.

•

Your advice was well structured, including appropriate headings, and a clear conclusion.

•

Your advice is structured using headings but may have lacked a clear conclusion.

Adequate proofreading is evident: submission is relatively free of errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation.

•

•

•

•

You always provided relevant and appropriate legal authorities to justify your conclusions.

•

You almost always provided relevant and appropriate legal authorities to justify your conclusions.

•

All references are correct in detail and footnotes are consistently styled using the AGLC4.

•

Most references are correct in detail and footnotes are consistently styled using the AGLC4.

•

2

Errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation with occasional impact on meaning and readability.

You usually provided relevant and appropriate legal authorities to justify your conclusions, but in some instances authorities were missing, incorrect or inappropriate. Many references are correct in detail and footnotes are mostly styled using the AGLC4.

•

•

Your presentation of legal concepts and advice in your exercise was sound, but lacked clarity and conciseness and were not communicated using a professional tone.

•

Your advice demonstrated a limited ability to present legal concepts and advice clearly, concisely and in plain English.

•

The structure of your advice is satisfactory but there is limited or inconsistent use of headings throughout.

Your advice lacks a clear structure that makes it appear meandering and difficult to follow.

•

Unsatisfactory proofreading: multiple errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation with significant impact on meaning and readability.

•

Your assignment demonstrated limited understanding of when legal authorities are required.

•

Referencing practices are incorrect and did not comply with the AGLC4.

•

Multiple errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation with significant impact on meaning and readability.

•

Your assignment demonstrated that you understood legal authorities were required, but you may not have used appropriate legal authorities and many authorities were missing or incorrect

•

There were several instances of noncompliance with the AGLC4....