Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Law Unit 4 14th June 2013 (AQA) watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lharto)
    I genuinely think law and morals will be up, if any of you get the AQA law review, for the LAW03 June exam (January one was cancelled due to snow-.-) articles in may published where about reviewing non-fatals and UDAM and they were the exact things on the paper and only last month did they put an article on morality in the UK, they are written by aqa and practically tell you what will be in, just too let you all know, good luck for it!



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I re-sat the Law03 paper last week too- and I had revised non-fatal reforms thoroughly thinking they would come up and they did I'm hoping that law and morals will come up as that's my strongest answer!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emilyjobling)
    Im getting really confused about section B. I am only revising law and Justice and Law and Morality? You only have to write about One question don't you? will one of those two defiantly come up, so confused!
    You have to choose either section A or B and do both of those questions. Then for section C you will only have to answer one question. If you have been taught Law and Justice and Law and Morality, then learn both- we'll have to wait and see what comes up but you only have to answer whichever one you know.
    Hope that helps.
    Also, have a look on the AQA website for past papers and read the instructions and try doing a whole paper just so you know what you're in for
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lauramassey)
    I'm doing a past paper on tort but can someone help me please!
    It basically says ken engaged mike to repair tiles in his pool but then mike slips on a tile, breaks his arm and can't work for two months. Would i talk about occupoers liability or vicarious liability or both?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You'd need to talk about occupiers liability 57 as he's a lawful visitor, but because he's a specialist visitor under s2(3)(b) the nature of the duty under s2(2) will be varied as it may be reasonable to assume a specialist visitor will take care to ensure they protect against risks within their specialism - so you'd need to debate that! use a supporting case like roles v nathan hope this helps! good luck
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lharto)
    You won't have time to write it out in detail twice so we've been told
    Do it detailed once and brief the second time you mention it


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Ahh Brilliant! Thanks a lot!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by seana39223)
    I'd day my strong point is actually summarizing the defenses.
    Help me? hahaa I'm terrible at summarizing! I end up waffling on!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Quick question: What's the best way of explaining the difference between the different types of burglary? (s9 (1) (a), s9 (1) (b) )
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LibertineDan)
    Quick question: What's the best way of explaining the difference between the different types of burglary? (s9 (1) (a), s9 (1) (b) )
    S9 (1) (a) deals with the situation where the D intends to commit an offence of theft, gbh or criminal damage(ulterior offence)at the time he enters the building.

    S9 (1) (b) Under S9(1)(b)-after having entered any building or part of a building as a trespasser the D commits or attempts to commit either:- Theft or Gbh

    Hope that helps in some way, goodluck!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lharto)
    I genuinely think law and morals will be up, if any of you get the AQA law review, for the LAW03 June exam (January one was cancelled due to snow-.-) articles in may published where about reviewing non-fatals and UDAM and they were the exact things on the paper and only last month did they put an article on morality in the UK, they are written by aqa and practically tell you what will be in, just too let you all know, good luck for it!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    There are never Law Unit 4 exams in January.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Help! I've been revising for other exams and now completely forgot about Law.

    Anyway, I have a few questions:

    Does one need to actually appropriate the property to be guilty of Theft? E.g. if someone saw a bike that they believed to be theirs, and they tried to take it but then they saw the owner come so they ran off without taking it. Is that theft? They didn't actually take the bike.

    Also, does a stadium qualify as a building?

    And let's say if someone saw a counter say "Free pies" so that person takes the free pies, when actually it said "Free pies with other purchases". I understand he'd get the 2(1)(a) defence, but how would you deal with it in terms of the second part of the Ghosh test? Would you say that he would not have thought reasonable person would consider his actions to be dishonest since he believed it said "Free pies"?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by seana39223)
    There are never Law Unit 4 exams in January.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If you read it, it clearly say LAW03 UNIT 3


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lharto)
    If you read it, it clearly say LAW03 UNIT 3


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Woods sorry haha. But the Law Unit 3 exam did go ahead in January as I sat it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cryl)
    Help! I've been revising for other exams and now completely forgot about Law.

    Anyway, I have a few questions:

    Does one need to actually appropriate the property to be guilty of Theft? E.g. if someone saw a bike that they believed to be theirs, and they tried to take it but then they saw the owner come so they ran off without taking it. Is that theft? They didn't actually take the bike.

    Also, does a stadium qualify as a building?

    And let's say if someone saw a counter say "Free pies" so that person takes the free pies, when actually it said "Free pies with other purchases". I understand he'd get the 2(1)(a) defence, but how would you deal with it in terms of the second part of the Ghosh test? Would you say that he would not have thought reasonable person would consider his actions to be dishonest since he believed it said "Free pies"?
    1) Yes, appropriation needs to have taken place - R v Morris. Only one right need be assumed for appropriation to take place. In the scenario you mentioned, the right to possession was taken over, although the mens rea is not there so no theft would have occurred - there's no dishonesty. If someone fails to complete a theft you could mention R v Easom which demonstrates conditional intent.

    2) Yes, a stadium counts. Just remember, 'building' implies a degree of permanence.

    3) I think the Ghosh test would fail here, so there would be no mens rea but it would be good to discuss that point if you have the time
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by seana39223)
    Woods sorry haha. But the Law Unit 3 exam did go ahead in January as I sat it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yes but my college cancelled it, due to 'snow' everyone else sat it, but my college, damn ex principle


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ed-)
    1) Yes, appropriation needs to have taken place - R v Morris. Only one right need be assumed for appropriation to take place. In the scenario you mentioned, the right to possession was taken over, although the mens rea is not there so no theft would have occurred - there's no dishonesty. If someone fails to complete a theft you could mention R v Easom which demonstrates conditional intent.
    Awesome, thanks. Ah, I didn't know about right to possession. So one can "posses" something and "unposess" it but they would still be guilty of Theft.

    (Original post by ed-)
    2) Yes, a stadium counts. Just remember, 'building' implies a degree of permanence.
    Great. So it does not need four walls and a roof? But a garden cannot be a building?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cryl)
    Awesome, thanks. Ah, I didn't know about right to possession. So one can "posses" something and "unposess" it but they would still be guilty of Theft.
    Well, that's like the case of R v Easom; if they give it back, then it was most likely an attempted theft rather than an actual theft

    Great. So it does not need four walls and a roof? But a garden cannot be a building?
    I'm not sure how it works exactly.. Maybe because there's shelter in a stadium? Either way, I remember a scenario in class which involved a theft in a stadium and the mark scheme said that it was burglary
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    If a question is clearly 9(1)(a) burglary and not 9(1)(b) or visa versa do you still have to mention the other one? Also with criminal damage do we have to learn Arson???
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cryl)
    great. So it does not need four walls and a roof? But a garden cannot be a building?
    We've been advised to state the case of Stevens and gourley which defined a building to be 'a structure of considerable size intended to be permanent'


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kmackenzz)
    If a question is clearly 9(1)(a) burglary and not 9(1)(b) or visa versa do you still have to mention the other one? Also with criminal damage do we have to learn Arson???
    No to first question ( only when you initially define burglary) and only if the question mentions arson with criminal damage


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ed-)
    Well, that's like the case of R v Easom; if they give it back, then it was most likely an attempted theft rather than an actual theft
    We haven't studied R v Easom, hence not attempted Theft. But I'll take your advice and briefly mention attempted theft if a scenario like this comes up

    (Original post by ed-)
    I'm not sure how it works exactly.. Maybe because there's shelter in a stadium? Either way, I remember a scenario in class which involved a theft in a stadium and the mark scheme said that it was burglary
    Ah, yes. I remember that past paper but it said "He entered a stadium with walls and a metal roof" - so I think roof might be the key. In the specimen past paper, that I'm doing, it simply mentions "he entered a statidum" - so perhaps, it's open to debate.

    Thanks for your help.

    I have another question for you/anyone else: if Ken steals his dry-cleaning jacket from Norma who dry-cleaned his jacket, I know Norma has a proprietary right to the jacket; but would Ken have intention to permanently deprive Norma of the jacket or the money for the dry cleaning?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ed-)
    Well, that's like the case of R v Easom; if they give it back, then it was most likely an attempted theft rather than an actual theft



    I'm not sure how it works exactly.. Maybe because there's shelter in a stadium? Either way, I remember a scenario in class which involved a theft in a stadium and the mark scheme said that it was burglary
    It wasn't conditional theft that scenario with the bike the theft was complete though as the appropriation had occurred by touching the bike and therefore one of the rights of the owner were assumed (disregarding the lack of mens rea)
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: August 26, 2013
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.