[Ape Gone Insane]

My books have been dispatched.

And we have 3 dates for various "prestigious" firms coming over and for the annual Law Fair.

[missimpossible]

(Original post by G8D)
I take it we don't get any indication of what books to have outside of the Moodle documentation?

I also assume it's not expected to have all Semester 1 books by Monday :/

Nope, you don't get anything like that because that would be helpful. The only book you really need for SISL is the Turpin & Tomkins one - and the e-book is available on the library website. Personally had to have a hard copy myself (round about £35). It's pretty comprehensive for SISL - it's also a very dry read. I wasn't a big fan of SISL really. Some parts are really interesting - personally I like the Human Rights stuff, and some of the first two units - but it wasn't for me. I think why a lot of people don't like it is that it tries to cover so much in so little time - other unis, Caley for one, split it up into different subjects, each with an exam at the end. You should manage alright, just make sure you prepare for the tutorials - but don't bother with the additional reading, otherwise you might die from the strain. Group exercise is easy marks IF you can get in a group with people who aren't complete diddies (I had my own fun experience where I was in a group of four people, one of whom disappeared, and another of whom dropped out) - so try and suss out the clever people in your tutorial quickish and team up with them. Legal Methods looks much worse than it is - once you break it down it's fine. Studying for the exam is the most stressful thing ever because of the breadth of the course, but I think they're fairly lenient on the marking. And I have no idea about S. Craig. I got Jim Murdoch, who was a sound guy, but had a tendency to not, er, cover whatever it was we were supposed to be covering.

Sorry, that turned into a bit of a tl;dr - SISL tends to bring out my ranting side

And nah, I wouldn't worry too much as there's not too much reading in your first week, as long as you've got them before you start tutorials because you will need them then

EDIT: When I say one of our group disappeared, I mean they defected to another group - if she'd ACTUALLY disappeared I might have been more inclined to be sympathetic.

[becbec :)]

(Original post by Tortious)
What are the questions like? Are they reading comprehension-style, or things to think about for a discussion?

Most are comprehension - 'What offence had the appellants been charged?', 'What issue is raised?' etc, but I think some are leading to discussion. This is the preparation for our first criminal supervision

[missimpossible]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
Good post, especially this. One of the guys in my group dropped out, but hadn't told anyone because he still wanted his Student Loan. What a chancer

The drop out in our group couldn't make up her mind whether to drop out, then kept saying she was waiting on hearing back from a job she'd been interviewed for. Sigh. I hated that task.

I spent £98 on three books today. I hate Law.

[Ape Gone Insane]

Statute Book


Laura J Macgregor, Avizandum Legislation on The Scots Law of Obligations, 4th edn Avizandum (2009)

You are allowed to take this text into the exams for this module and for Delict on the following conditions:

The text must not be marked in any way except that you may write your name on the inside cover and you may use flourescent highlighter pens to highlight or underline text.

Other than the inscription of your name the text must not be marked with post-its or equivalent or with ball point, roller ball, fountain, cartridge, non-flourescent felt-tip or quill pen, crayon, pastel, paint, creosote or other preservative or chalk.

Any text found in breach of this rule will be removed from the candidate for the duration of the exam. The decision on whether marks fall within or outwith the rule lies with the invigilator or person acting for him or her whose decision shall be final.

Please note. Past experience indicates that only a minority of students is able to use the statute book to advantage in the exam hall. Unless you are already reasonably familiar with the relevant provisions, you know what they are and can find them quickly, having the book in the exam hall is of no great benefit. The book is only useful if you are prepared to study the statutory provisions covered in the module as the module progresses. In short, the book will only help if you know what is in it and trying to get hold of a copy at the last minute before the exam will reveal you as a fool.

I ordered it and hope I'm actually able to use it properly.

[missimpossible]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
That's a bloody nuisance, and you'd feel bad going to the tutor about it.

Did you see my post in the Glasgow Uni thread? £396 for one of my recommended texts. Joy. The other 2 for that course come to a nice £150, so it's not all bad

Yeah, exactly. I ended up going to the tutor about it after she left, maybe 10 days before it had to be handed in - he was also my adviser last semester because my actual adviser was away. Anyway, I got an email from him telling me to speak to my adviser about it. Which was him. Odd man.

And yeah, I saw that I'm only complaining because I got the rest cheaper . But that's... do they actually expect you to BUY that?

[Ape Gone Insane]

I don't think I ever want to drink ginger beer now... decomposed snails

[G8D]

First day tomorrow

[Ape Gone Insane]

May the force of the Law be with you.

[Ape Gone Insane]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
Wasn't actually ginger beer, the case just proceeded on that premise because the Judges weren't au fait with Glasgow slang. It was just a "boatil o' ginger", or so we were told.

Interesting, haven't read the entire case yet. What modules are you doing this year?

Best get back to work.

Tasks

Task 1: For a brief but straight forward introduction to the facts of the case, an outline of the legal arguments put by counsel and a majority view, read Lord Thankerton's speech [pages 58-61]which largely confines itself to the facts and (unlike some of the other speeches) has very little discussion of the authorities.

As you read, identify the arguments based upon the facts and those based upon the law in the speech, and think about the significance of that distinction. Make a list of what you consider to be the key facts and the key legal arguments.

Task 2: Read the speeches of Lord Buckmaster and Lord Atkin in that order.
Identify the policy reasons behind Lord Atkin's reasoning [at pages 44-46] and think about the particular emphasis he placed upon moral responsibility.

Task 3: Compare Lord Atkin's policy reasons with those referred to in Lord Buckmaster's speech [at pages 42-44] and consider the reasons why these two judges differed in their respective emphases.

Two tasks to go.

[missimpossible]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
Wasn't actually ginger beer, the case just proceeded on that premise because the Judges weren't au fait with Glasgow slang. It was just a "boatil o' ginger", or so we were told.


Seems like the tutor got a bit lost. You get anything out of it? And fair play for going to them, right thing to do.

I'm unsure, I'm hoping the School gets a discount like it does for Tax Law. Either that or the library orders in 100 copies...

Nah, we were just told to get on with it and ended up with a C2. Was a bit annoyed, but I guess it could have been worse. I've learned my lesson about group-picking though

(Original post by G8D)
First day tomorrow

Good luck

[Ape Gone Insane]

Best get my reading done.

[G8D]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
My honours classes don't meet 'til next week. Wahey. Means I don't know which books to buy, though. Bugger.

Doing Private International Law and Labour Law too this semester, and had those lectures today, both seem really interesting.

What books was it you have on offer again?

[Ape Gone Insane]

Books have arrived ()with the exception of Woolman Contract and Scottish Legal System (neither of which have been dispatched ).

I now have;

Scots Criminal Law: A Critical Analysis (written by my lecturer )
Learning Legal Rules
Avizandum Legislation on the Scots Law of Obligations
Scots Private Law
Scots Law Essentials
Understanding Law
Contract Law in Scotland
The Study Skills Companion
Studying Scots Law
How To Write Law Essays and Exams

[Tortious]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
Wasn't actually ginger beer, the case just proceeded on that premise because the Judges weren't au fait with Glasgow slang. It was just a "boatil o' ginger", or so we were told.


Seems like the tutor got a bit lost. You get anything out of it? And fair play for going to them, right thing to do.

I'm unsure, I'm hoping the School gets a discount like it does for Tax Law. Either that or the library orders in 100 copies...

Hi, quick tort question - are public wrongs torts? I've been sent some reading and the authors only imply that they aren't. To give you the part in context, they're talking about the residual wrongs model.

Some might argue..."what about public nuisance? That is a completely different kind of tort to all the other torts...Surely that shows that the residual wrongs view of tort law is correct, and that the various torts gathered together in the textbooks really have nothing in common?"

...

But does this show that the residual wrongs view of tort law is correct? Not really. It could be argued - and we would argue - that public nuisance is not a tort at all. It is not a private wrong. Rather, it is a public wrong. [It's only in the textbooks because they're wedded to the loss compensation model or residual wrongs model.]

Thanks.

[Tortious]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
I'm not the person to ask, you're better asking an English law student. I can help with some things, but our Delict seems a bit different from your tort, here at least. They seem to say, though, that because there is no specific, identifiable victim, there can be no tort, which seems about right.

Right, thanks. I thought it was (probably) a pretty basic question which would have a similar answer in Scotland. McBride gives the example of destroying the nest of a rare bird as a public wrong, but that wouldn't (I'm guessing) constitute a tort - which is the same as the conclusion you drew. All he's really said about what torts are is that they're civil wrongs...although that's not to say all civil wrongs will be torts!

Thanks again.

[Ape Gone Insane]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
X

When it is said you should do "reading" either in a lecture or by other people, "I done 5 hours of reading" - does that mean reading (a 300-400 page book) or reading and making notes (300-400 page book)?

[Ape Gone Insane]

(Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
Reading and remembering, really. I need to take notes.

Sorry for bugging you but I am reading Thornton v. Shoe Lane Parking Ltd [1971] 2Q.B. 163. It's an appeal in the Court of Appeal but is it actually Queen's Bench, Court of Appeal?

I cannot, for the life of me, find where the decision was made in the first instance...

[G8D]

£139 on books and that's only the ones I need for the coming month :|

[Ape Gone Insane]

Paget's Law of Banking. Alternate.

Hardbacks