Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Aqa law unit 2 *offical thread* Watch

  • View Poll Results: What grade do you think you got on the law unit 2 exam?
    A
    14
    34.15%
    B
    14
    34.15%
    C
    5
    12.20%
    D
    4
    9.76%
    E
    2
    4.88%
    U
    2
    4.88%

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kware96)
    In Tort did everyone pick up on the sly question about Factual Causation & RoD?
    OMG yes it really confused me for a bit, since we'd already explained remoteness but then it clicked after
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    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)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bruce267099)
    What about it?
    Was that question 9?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    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?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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 :-)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    On that remoteness of damage question, what did you have to include?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (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??
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    yessss i just talked about legal causation and the egg shell skull rule
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Guys what did you all include for question 9,10,11 and 12 on tort
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bruce267099)
    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

    Are you sure you had to explain factual causation the question only asked about remoteness?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Are unpaid trial work shifts fair?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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