Go to first unread
Back
to top
AQA AS Law Unit 2 (19/05/2017) Predictions [Criminal & Tort]
Watch
Announcements
Got some things to consider that could potentially come up as they either didn't appear last year and potentially haven't come up for sometime if at all.
Criminal
Q1/2
1. Explain how the Actus Reus can be the basis of a crime
> Voluntary act, state of affairs, omissions
2. Strict liability being the basis of a crime
> Case of Shar & Larsonner
Q3/4
1. Battery / Assault in scenario leading to ABH
2. Battery / Assault alone
Q5/6
1. Aims of sentencing
2. Outline range of sentencing for specific offence or factors court will consider
Tort
Q7
1. 3 Risk factors
2. How a duty is owed
Q8
1. How risk factor affects the standard (if 3 risk factors are not asked in Q7)
2. Explaining the rules of Factual causation & remoteness of damage
Questions after this can get messy and it's hard to predict these as they usually overlap with past papers somehow unless someone want's to have a go at predicting them.
Criminal
Q1/2
1. Explain how the Actus Reus can be the basis of a crime
> Voluntary act, state of affairs, omissions
2. Strict liability being the basis of a crime
> Case of Shar & Larsonner
Q3/4
1. Battery / Assault in scenario leading to ABH
2. Battery / Assault alone
Q5/6
1. Aims of sentencing
2. Outline range of sentencing for specific offence or factors court will consider
Tort
Q7
1. 3 Risk factors
2. How a duty is owed
Q8
1. How risk factor affects the standard (if 3 risk factors are not asked in Q7)
2. Explaining the rules of Factual causation & remoteness of damage
Questions after this can get messy and it's hard to predict these as they usually overlap with past papers somehow unless someone want's to have a go at predicting them.
1
reply
Report
#2
(Original post by CHarrisMedia)
Got some things to consider that could potentially come up as they either didn't appear last year and potentially haven't come up for sometime if at all.
Criminal
Q1/2
1. Explain how the Actus Reus can be the basis of a crime
> Voluntary act, state of affairs, omissions
2. Strict liability being the basis of a crime
> Case of Shar & Larsonner
Q3/4
1. Battery / Assault in scenario leading to ABH
2. Battery / Assault alone
Q5/6
1. Aims of sentencing
2. Outline range of sentencing for specific offence or factors court will consider
Tort
Q7
1. 3 Risk factors
2. How a duty is owed
Q8
1. How risk factor affects the standard (if 3 risk factors are not asked in Q7)
2. Explaining the rules of Factual causation & remoteness of damage
Questions after this can get messy and it's hard to predict these as they usually overlap with past papers somehow unless someone want's to have a go at predicting them.
Got some things to consider that could potentially come up as they either didn't appear last year and potentially haven't come up for sometime if at all.
Criminal
Q1/2
1. Explain how the Actus Reus can be the basis of a crime
> Voluntary act, state of affairs, omissions
2. Strict liability being the basis of a crime
> Case of Shar & Larsonner
Q3/4
1. Battery / Assault in scenario leading to ABH
2. Battery / Assault alone
Q5/6
1. Aims of sentencing
2. Outline range of sentencing for specific offence or factors court will consider
Tort
Q7
1. 3 Risk factors
2. How a duty is owed
Q8
1. How risk factor affects the standard (if 3 risk factors are not asked in Q7)
2. Explaining the rules of Factual causation & remoteness of damage
Questions after this can get messy and it's hard to predict these as they usually overlap with past papers somehow unless someone want's to have a go at predicting them.
0
reply
Report
#5
Do you still think aims will come up even though it did last year?
(Original post by CHarrisMedia)
Got some things to consider that could potentially come up as they either didn't appear last year and potentially haven't come up for sometime if at all.
Criminal
Q1/2
1. Explain how the Actus Reus can be the basis of a crime
> Voluntary act, state of affairs, omissions
2. Strict liability being the basis of a crime
> Case of Shar & Larsonner
Q3/4
1. Battery / Assault in scenario leading to ABH
2. Battery / Assault alone
Q5/6
1. Aims of sentencing
2. Outline range of sentencing for specific offence or factors court will consider
Tort
Q7
1. 3 Risk factors
2. How a duty is owed
Q8
1. How risk factor affects the standard (if 3 risk factors are not asked in Q7)
2. Explaining the rules of Factual causation & remoteness of damage
Questions after this can get messy and it's hard to predict these as they usually overlap with past papers somehow unless someone want's to have a go at predicting them.
Got some things to consider that could potentially come up as they either didn't appear last year and potentially haven't come up for sometime if at all.
Criminal
Q1/2
1. Explain how the Actus Reus can be the basis of a crime
> Voluntary act, state of affairs, omissions
2. Strict liability being the basis of a crime
> Case of Shar & Larsonner
Q3/4
1. Battery / Assault in scenario leading to ABH
2. Battery / Assault alone
Q5/6
1. Aims of sentencing
2. Outline range of sentencing for specific offence or factors court will consider
Tort
Q7
1. 3 Risk factors
2. How a duty is owed
Q8
1. How risk factor affects the standard (if 3 risk factors are not asked in Q7)
2. Explaining the rules of Factual causation & remoteness of damage
Questions after this can get messy and it's hard to predict these as they usually overlap with past papers somehow unless someone want's to have a go at predicting them.
0
reply
Report
#6
CRIMINAL
1/2) Actus reus. Mens rea. Strict liability. Causation.
3/4) Battery/ABH
5/6) Factors affecting sentencing and procedure to trial. Could be types of sentences. Weird feeling it might be bail
TORT
1/2) DOC/Risk factors
3/4) Damage. Res ipsa loquitur and breach.
5/6) Damages. Tracks/courts.
1/2) Actus reus. Mens rea. Strict liability. Causation.
3/4) Battery/ABH
5/6) Factors affecting sentencing and procedure to trial. Could be types of sentences. Weird feeling it might be bail
TORT
1/2) DOC/Risk factors
3/4) Damage. Res ipsa loquitur and breach.
5/6) Damages. Tracks/courts.
1
reply
Report
#7
They might give a question specifically on legal causation for criminal because this is the last year for the spec so it should be tricky.
I suggest you learn the types of legal causation such as:
-operating and substantial cause test (smith - treatment was 'thouroughly bad')
-Intervening act (malchereck)
-thin skull rule/take your victim as you find him (blaue)
-victim's own as (williams and roberts)
I suggest you learn the types of legal causation such as:
-operating and substantial cause test (smith - treatment was 'thouroughly bad')
-Intervening act (malchereck)
-thin skull rule/take your victim as you find him (blaue)
-victim's own as (williams and roberts)
0
reply
Report
#8
Gonna sound silly, bur if a question said explain 'actus reus' what would you write?
0
reply
Report
#9
(Original post by x_Megan_xo)
Gonna sound silly, bur if a question said explain 'actus reus' what would you write?
Gonna sound silly, bur if a question said explain 'actus reus' what would you write?
-Guilty act
-must be voluntary...refer to Hill v Baxter as involuntary
-it could be an omission
omission cases: Pittwood, Dytham, Miller and Stone and Dobinson
There 8 marks SIMPLE!!!!!
Its tort that is the tricky one.
0
reply
Report
#10
(Original post by mnc61)
That is not silly. You should write in order:
-Guilty act
-must be voluntary...refer to Hill v Baxter as involuntary
-it could be an omission
omission cases: Pittwood, Dytham, Miller and Stone and Dobinson
There 8 marks SIMPLE!!!!!
Its tort that is the tricky one.
That is not silly. You should write in order:
-Guilty act
-must be voluntary...refer to Hill v Baxter as involuntary
-it could be an omission
omission cases: Pittwood, Dytham, Miller and Stone and Dobinson
There 8 marks SIMPLE!!!!!
Its tort that is the tricky one.
0
reply
Report
#11
(Original post by x_Megan_xo)
Oh no I love tort! I hate criminal law
Oh no I love tort! I hate criminal law
0
reply
Report
#13
(Original post by CHarrisMedia)
Got some things to consider that could potentially come up as they either didn't appear last year and potentially haven't come up for sometime if at all.
Criminal
Q1/2
1. Explain how the Actus Reus can be the basis of a crime
> Voluntary act, state of affairs, omissions
2. Strict liability being the basis of a crime
> Case of Shar & Larsonner
Q3/4
1. Battery / Assault in scenario leading to ABH
2. Battery / Assault alone
Q5/6
1. Aims of sentencing
2. Outline range of sentencing for specific offence or factors court will consider
Tort
Q7
1. 3 Risk factors
2. How a duty is owed
Q8
1. How risk factor affects the standard (if 3 risk factors are not asked in Q7)
2. Explaining the rules of Factual causation & remoteness of damage
Questions after this can get messy and it's hard to predict these as they usually overlap with past papers somehow unless someone want's to have a go at predicting them.
Got some things to consider that could potentially come up as they either didn't appear last year and potentially haven't come up for sometime if at all.
Criminal
Q1/2
1. Explain how the Actus Reus can be the basis of a crime
> Voluntary act, state of affairs, omissions
2. Strict liability being the basis of a crime
> Case of Shar & Larsonner
Q3/4
1. Battery / Assault in scenario leading to ABH
2. Battery / Assault alone
Q5/6
1. Aims of sentencing
2. Outline range of sentencing for specific offence or factors court will consider
Tort
Q7
1. 3 Risk factors
2. How a duty is owed
Q8
1. How risk factor affects the standard (if 3 risk factors are not asked in Q7)
2. Explaining the rules of Factual causation & remoteness of damage
Questions after this can get messy and it's hard to predict these as they usually overlap with past papers somehow unless someone want's to have a go at predicting them.
0
reply
(Original post by Chichaldo)
You got 60% or so tbf, I hope no one only properly revised what you mentioned though!
You got 60% or so tbf, I hope no one only properly revised what you mentioned though!
If people only revised my predictions they got themselves into a stupid position, I would never simply rely on predictions, but those predictions are based from patterns and what hasn't come up. I didn't realise last year was an actus reus question until earlier today otherwise I would have changed it.
If you did thoroughly revise everything in the predictions however you should get a fair grade as alot of the weight was carried in the two OAPA predictions which were spot on along with the remoteness of damage, risk factors etc.
I personally was very shocked to see a 10 mark question on Res Ipsa Loquitur as it's quite a simple concept, gave a detailed explanation but only had 1 case (London Catherine Docks), I can only assume the majority of the marks here come from application but that did catch me off guard.
0
reply
(Original post by new1234)
Really? I found res ipsa loquitur wasn't that bad!
Really? I found res ipsa loquitur wasn't that bad!
0
reply
Report
#17
(Original post by CHarrisMedia)
Unfortunately we wasn't taught any other case than St Catherine Docks so that didn't go well :P I think it did surprise many people though.
Unfortunately we wasn't taught any other case than St Catherine Docks so that didn't go well :P I think it did surprise many people though.
0
reply
Report
#18
(Original post by CHarrisMedia)
"things to consider that could potentially come up"
If people only revised my predictions they got themselves into a stupid position, I would never simply rely on predictions, but those predictions are based from patterns and what hasn't come up. I didn't realise last year was an actus reus question until earlier today otherwise I would have changed it.
If you did thoroughly revise everything in the predictions however you should get a fair grade as alot of the weight was carried in the two OAPA predictions which were spot on along with the remoteness of damage, risk factors etc.
I personally was very shocked to see a 10 mark question on Res Ipsa Loquitur as it's quite a simple concept, gave a detailed explanation but only had 1 case (London Catherine Docks), I can only assume the majority of the marks here come from application but that did catch me off guard.
"things to consider that could potentially come up"
If people only revised my predictions they got themselves into a stupid position, I would never simply rely on predictions, but those predictions are based from patterns and what hasn't come up. I didn't realise last year was an actus reus question until earlier today otherwise I would have changed it.
If you did thoroughly revise everything in the predictions however you should get a fair grade as alot of the weight was carried in the two OAPA predictions which were spot on along with the remoteness of damage, risk factors etc.
I personally was very shocked to see a 10 mark question on Res Ipsa Loquitur as it's quite a simple concept, gave a detailed explanation but only had 1 case (London Catherine Docks), I can only assume the majority of the marks here come from application but that did catch me off guard.
0
reply
(Original post by new1234)
Ohh noooo! I was taught it well sooo. You will get credit for defining it and applying some of it though!!
Ohh noooo! I was taught it well sooo. You will get credit for defining it and applying some of it though!!
0
reply
Report
#20
(Original post by CHarrisMedia)
Hopefully! Tbf I enjoyed the exam, it could've gone alot worse, now to bring on unit 3/4 :|
Hopefully! Tbf I enjoyed the exam, it could've gone alot worse, now to bring on unit 3/4 :|
0
reply
X
Quick Reply
