What all did you put in for the question on how they deal with either way offences? I struggled to find a lot to put into that answer when I came across it!
Hey, I mainly spoke about plea before venue and mode of trial. Plea before venue is where the Magistrates courts would get a plea from the defendant asking them whether or not they are guilty or not for the offence held against them. If they say they are guilty then the Magistrates court would take up the case, agreeing to trial it. However along the way, if they think the case is too serious, they would transfer it to the crown court. If D pleaded not guilty, they would then go on to mode of trial where it's hear they try to seeing whether the case is more suitable for the Magistrates courts or Crown court. I need to work on this, sorry if this wasn't helpful. But you could check out the mark scheme. page 28 gives a brief answer and page 13 of the examiner's reports gives a good answer to on how to approach this question. http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-LAW01-W-MS-JUN13.PDF http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-LAW01-WRE-JUN13.PDF
If something came up last year is it likely it will be on this year?
No. But in 2013, back when they did January exams- they did for the January and summer exams. But it's only been then. Since learn the material though however I wouldn't focus on them because so much still hasn't showed up yet i.e two rules of language etc. They'd most likely repeat questions for the resit papers in 2017. Doubt they would though for normal years.
Hey, I mainly spoke about plea before venue and mode of trial. Plea before venue is where the Magistrates courts would get a plea from the defendant asking them whether or not they are guilty or not for the offence held against them. If they say they are guilty then the Magistrates court would take up the case, agreeing to trial it. However along the way, if they think the case is too serious, they would transfer it to the crown court. If D pleaded not guilty, they would then go on to mode of trial where it's hear they try to seeing whether the case is more suitable for the Magistrates courts or Crown court. I need to work on this, sorry if this wasn't helpful. But you could check out the mark scheme. page 28 gives a brief answer and page 13 of the examiner's reports gives a good answer to on how to approach this question. http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-LAW01-W-MS-JUN13.PDF http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-LAW01-WRE-JUN13.PDF
Thanks that's great! Yeah i know the basics I just found it difficult to bulk the answer up to be worth 10 marks if you get me. It's a tough style of question I think!
Thanks that's great! Yeah i know the basics I just found it difficult to bulk the answer up to be worth 10 marks if you get me. It's a tough style of question I think!
Totally agree. I feel the same way for that trial and appeal courts question. Just praying it won't come up. I have a feeling it will. Sigh.
oh that's great thank you. i have heard that in civil there has been a change in the multi-track since last year do you know what the change is ?
I thought that small claims were up to £1,000 for personal injury and £10,000 for claims, fast tracks are between £10-25,000 and multi track are legally complex, of £25,000+
For those doing ADR and the Civil Courts, is one of the 3 questions always advantages and disadvantages and never advantages/disadvantages separately?
Looked at the past papers up to Jan 2013 and this seems to be the case... Anyone seen any past papers before Jan 2013?
I've never seen it on an actual past paper, but I do remember the text book I had last year having an example answer to a question that was asking only for the disadvantages of tribunals. So reasonably, there is a chance they could ask you just to discuss just advantages or disadvantages.
What's your predictions for statutory interpretation, judicial precedent and criminal courts and lay people guys?
Mine are -
SI - rules of language, mischief rule or purposive rule JP - avoiding precedent in court of appeal or any court CC&LP - appeal courts and possibly something including the training of magistrates
I'm so confused about Criminal Courts and Lay People guys!!! I don't know what to revise, any potential questions for the paper coming up??? I only know the role/selection of magistrates and jurors and nothing else can go into my head.
I thought that small claims were up to £1,000 for personal injury and £10,000 for claims, fast tracks are between £10-25,000 and multi track are legally complex, of £25,000+
what are you guys going on about is this unit 03 and 04?
I'm so confused about Criminal Courts and Lay People guys!!! I don't know what to revise, any potential questions for the paper coming up??? I only know the role/selection of magistrates and jurors and nothing else can go into my head.
They usually ask about the advantages/disadvantages of both jurors and magistrates.
I've learnt these as -
Magistrate advantages - RBCK Representative, 57% women, 9% ethnic minority Bingham (Lord) called them "democratic jewel beyond price" Cost, only pay for expenses, w/o magistrates would cost judicial system £100 million extra as will need 1000 more judges, all being paid at least £100,000 Knowledge of the area, in Paul V DPP, a man was able to be convicted based on the magistrate knowing that the area the defendant was kerb crawling was residential making it a nuisance.
Magistrate Disadvantages - RUPA Reliant on Legal Advisors, R V Eccles, the legal advisor retired with the magistrates although no law was being discussed Unrepresentative, 2/3 are managers compared to the 1/3 in society, also 57% are over 60 and 0.37% are under 30 which means defendants (usually under 25) are not being judged by their peers Prosecution Bias, Bingham Justice has told us that Magistrates have admitted to believing the police over defendants Auld report has said it is "disproportionately well off and middle class" as they can afford to work for free whereas lower classes cannot.
Jury Advantages - PEEL Public enthusiasm, for examples home office report 2004 found that over half of those summoned were 'enthusiastic' and the others feeling reluctant said this was mainly due to their availability. Equity, in Stephen Owens, the defendant attempted to kill the man who killed his son through bad driving and who had previous convictions, he was found innocent, showing morality and fairness come into light under the justice system without limitations of law. Elimination of bias, research in 2007 found that a racially mixed jury will not discriminate a defendant, showing its fairness. It has also been called 'the light that lets freedom live' Long and established approach, the magna carta 1215 has said 'every person has the right of a lawful judgement by their peers'
Jury Disadvantages - MBIC Misuse of media, jurors can be irresponsible and not follow their role properly, in Fraile and Sewart, the juror spoke to the defendant on Facebook whilst his guilt was being deliberated Bias, Jurys can judge people based on their appearance etc. Also in Dallas, the juror went home and researched the defendant and found out his previous convictions making her decision a biased one as they shouldn't know prev. convictions Influences, they can be easily knobbled by gang members,R V McKenna, the defendant was acquitted as the judge gave the jury a limited time frame which goes against them being independent Complexity of issues, sometimes Jurors don't take their role seriously and can be naive, in Delroy Grant, the defendant was charged with raping 29 women within 10 years, he argued his ex wife planted his semen, he was convicted on a 10-2 basis showing that 2 were fooled by his alibi.
I know this is a lot to learn in the few hours you have left but i hope it helps. They usually ask a question about the cases a mag/crown can deal with or the process or possibly the work of a magistrate. If you need help with these just ask.
They usually ask about the qualification and selection - which you have learnt as well as the advantages/disadvantages.