Aqa law unit 2 *offical thread*

OP

Questions were just for anyone that wants to check up...
1) how omissions can be the basis of AR (8 marks)
2) contemp rule (7 marks)
3) assault (8 marks + 2 A03)
4) GBH 20 (10 marks)
5) summary offence procedures, burden and standard of proof (7 marks)
6) 2 aims of sentencing (5 marks)

Tort:
7) breach and one risk factor (8 marks)
8) remoteness in damage (8 marks) - this was a generous question
9) damage and remoteness in negligence ( 8 marks + 2 A03)
10) duty of care ( 8 marks)
11) procedure to negligence claims (5 marks)
12) burden and standard of proof + res ispa loquitor (8 marks)

Reply 62

OP

Original post by Bruce267099

For the assault question i talked about assault fully, that one went fine.

In the one about GBH it said he may be charged for section 20. I defined the AR of section 20 and explained how he had the AR especially with brain damage being very serious harm. But then i said he did not have intention for any harm not even serious then i explained using the case of parmenter that if he does not see the risk he will be acquitted. Therefore as he only intended the MR for battery he would be charged for ABH. Will i get any marks in the second question?

Probably yeah- you'll at least get some lol

Reply 63

OP

Original post by Bruce267099

What about it?

Was that question 9?

Reply 64

Original post by AfcFob

OMG yes it really confused me for a bit, since we'd already explained remoteness but then it clicked after

What did we even have to do for that question again. :biggrin:

Reply 65

Original post by NHM

Probably yeah- you'll at least get some lol

I new i wouldn't get full credit for my answer hoepfully 4 marks. At least i aced the rest of the paper though. :biggrin:

Reply 66

Qmwnebrv

15

I got a bit confused on the section 20 question- I explained the offence and said he has the actus reus with the intervening act but not the mens rea so was not liable.I talked about causation for a bit as well.. is this right?
Plus a fire alarm went off in our exam- does this mean we will get extra marks?

Reply 67

Original post by Qmwnebrv

I got a bit confused on the section 20 question- I explained the offence and said he has the actus reus with the intervening act but not the mens rea so was not liable.I talked about causation for a bit as well.. is this right?
Plus a fire alarm went off in our exam- does this mean we will get extra marks?

Omg i put that, but i said he had the mens rea for s47 you will defnetely get some credit if you explained why and I'm not sure about causation this is usually only relevant in s47, but then i might be wrong.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 68

OP

Original post by Qmwnebrv

I got a bit confused on the section 20 question- I explained the offence and said he has the actus reus with the intervening act but not the mens rea so was not liable.I talked about causation for a bit as well.. is this right?
Plus a fire alarm went off in our exam- does this mean we will get extra marks?

5% extra marks normally :-)

Reply 69

Shehzad_10

1

On that remoteness of damage question, what did you have to include?

Reply 70

Qmwnebrv

15

Original post by NHM

5% extra marks normally :-)

Brilliant

It was good because i had time to sit and read the questions and case studies while they said to put our pens down.

Reply 71

OP

Original post by Shehzad_10

On that remoteness of damage question, what did you have to include?

I thought it was a trick at first that question you just had to talk about remoteness not factual cessation I think?

Reply 72

Original post by Shehzad_10

On that remoteness of damage question, what did you have to include?

On theory one,

I talked about factual causation + case
Damage being foreseeable + Wagon mound
Only damage has to be foreseeable + Smith v Hughes
Novus actus Interveniens + case
Thin Skull rule + case

Reply 73

username1344647

2

I'm a retake. I got a D in this paper last year, and thought this exam was really easy. Like how they gave you the offences, but the year 12's came out looking sad.
Aha. Wait until you all get to A2.

Reply 74

Haliem

Original post by NHM

Questions were just for anyone that wants to check up...
1) how omissions can be the basis of AR (8 marks)
2) contemp rule (7 marks)
3) assault (8 marks + 2 A03)
4) GBH 20 (10 marks)
5) summary offence procedures, burden and standard of proof (7 marks)
6) 2 aims of sentencing (5 marks)

Tort:
7) breach and one risk factor (8 marks)
8) remoteness in damage (8 marks) - this was a generous question
9) damage and remoteness in negligence ( 8 marks + 2 A03)
10) duty of care ( 8 marks)
11) procedure to negligence claims (5 marks)
12) burden and standard of proof + res ispa loquitor (8 marks)

So I guessed my points per question and it came up with 62? What kind of grade would this be??

Reply 75

Shehzad_10

1

yessss i just talked about legal causation and the egg shell skull rule

Reply 76

Original post by Shehzad_10

yessss i just talked about legal causation and the egg shell skull rule

I also included factual causation because i didn't want to be tricked out. :biggrin:

Reply 77

OP

Original post by Haliem

So I guessed my points per question and it came up with 62? What kind of grade would this be??

B grade

Reply 78

Guys what did you all include for question 9,10,11 and 12 on tort

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 79

OP