shren17
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 months ago
#1
Can someone please help me with this 25 marker question?
"The general defence of duress by circumstances /necessity is not fit for purpose. Discuss the extent to which you agree with this statement ?"
Thank You, it would mean a lot
0
reply
Knaz2020
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 months ago
#2
As a recent Law Grad, I can certainly tell you how I would go about tackling this question. The question is essentially asking you to analyse whether this particular defence is appropriate or not for its intended purpose. I would first draw up a plan and would attempt the question using the following structure:

Intro:
- Start your answer by stating exactly what it is that you will be discussing, this is effective signposting and helps the assessor marking your work to easily follow your answer from start to finish, and could lead to higher marks, particularly if your work falls between two grade boundaries.
- Define what defence of duress by circumstances/necessity is, and give some brief background information as to how it came about (remember to keep this very brief as its only a 25 marker, this should form part of the intro)
- In the intro, also make sure to point out why this defence exists, as you will use this later on in the essay when discussing if it is/isn't fit for purpose, as you will be evaluating the differing views which you can find from your research. (this is another example of signposting)

Main Body: The main chunk of the question revolves around analysing the pros and cons of this defence and then ultimately asserting your position as to this, ultimately deciding whether the defence does what it intends to do.

- find 3/4 arguments which shows that the defence of duress is not fit for purpose.
- for "circumstances" you could possibly mention how this defence is highly subjective, what one person may believe to be a circumstantial moment of duress, may not be the case for another, so there are Inconsistencies in the law. You can then support this by using the case of R v Conway, and then maybe do a little more reading around it, see what judges and academics think.
- Based on this, is this defence really a defence or is it just a loophole in the law allowing people to get away with criminal activity?

- Then find 3/4 arguments which shows that the defence of duress IS fit for purpose. (Can maybe mention fewer arguments if you have a word/time limit)
- Here you will counteract what you mentioned above, and express a view which is alternate to what has previously been stated.. For a higher mark, you should try to support these counter-arguments by referencing academics or any journal article which helps to support your view. This would go on to show that you have demonstrated critical analysis and are backing up the points you are making, as opposed to writing something along the lines of "I think this", after which you would only give your own opinion.
- You could mention how it is fit for purpose as everyone is different, and so circumstantial duress is fair as each individual can be judged subjectively, as a "one size fits all" approach may not be relevant. Also consider those with mental disabilities? surely they cannot be judged against the mental capacity of a reasonable man? therefore flexibility is required.
- Further Research in this area will help you bring out further points which you can mention.

Conclusion
- Don't introduce anything new here
- merely summarise what you've discussed in a sentence or two and then in another sentence, express your view on the matter, but be sure to back it up with your references. So for instance, "As alluded to by A, B and C, it can be seen that the general defence of duress is not fit for its intended purpose". For higher marks, you can briefly mention the perspective of someone disagreeing with you, stating how "some may disagree because of reasons D, E and F"....but then you would ultimately conclude by saying "However, it is Still not fit for purpose because of reasons G, H, and I".

Critical analysis and bringing in the perspective of those disagreeing with your point of view will help you get the higher marks, a good way of doing this would be to state a particular position of yours, and then immediately after, mention that "however, some (find a source) may disagree with this point of view because of....."

Hope that helps. I've gone pretty in depth here, and if this is an A-level question then you won't need to go as in depth with your answer as I have outlined above, as this is partly what would be expected at degree level, but seeing as I have a lot of experience in writing essays, both short and long, I have outlined the approach I would use. Based on the level you are at, you would be better placed to judge how much of this would be relevant enough for your own use.

Good luck!!
1
reply
msssmelia97
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#3
Report 6 months ago
#3
(Original post by Knaz2020)
As a recent Law Grad, I can certainly tell you how I would go about tackling this question. The question is essentially asking you to analyse whether this particular defence is appropriate or not for its intended purpose. I would first draw up a plan and would attempt the question using the following structure:

Intro:
- Start your answer by stating exactly what it is that you will be discussing, this is effective signposting and helps the assessor marking your work to easily follow your answer from start to finish, and could lead to higher marks, particularly if your work falls between two grade boundaries.
- Define what defence of duress by circumstances/necessity is, and give some brief background information as to how it came about (remember to keep this very brief as its only a 25 marker, this should form part of the intro)
- In the intro, also make sure to point out why this defence exists, as you will use this later on in the essay when discussing if it is/isn't fit for purpose, as you will be evaluating the differing views which you can find from your research. (this is another example of signposting)

Main Body: The main chunk of the question revolves around analysing the pros and cons of this defence and then ultimately asserting your position as to this, ultimately deciding whether the defence does what it intends to do.

- find 3/4 arguments which shows that the defence of duress is not fit for purpose.
- for "circumstances" you could possibly mention how this defence is highly subjective, what one person may believe to be a circumstantial moment of duress, may not be the case for another, so there are Inconsistencies in the law. You can then support this by using the case of R v Conway, and then maybe do a little more reading around it, see what judges and academics think.
- Based on this, is this defence really a defence or is it just a loophole in the law allowing people to get away with criminal activity?

- Then find 3/4 arguments which shows that the defence of duress IS fit for purpose. (Can maybe mention fewer arguments if you have a word/time limit)
- Here you will counteract what you mentioned above, and express a view which is alternate to what has previously been stated.. For a higher mark, you should try to support these counter-arguments by referencing academics or any journal article which helps to support your view. This would go on to show that you have demonstrated critical analysis and are backing up the points you are making, as opposed to writing something along the lines of "I think this", after which you would only give your own opinion.
- You could mention how it is fit for purpose as everyone is different, and so circumstantial duress is fair as each individual can be judged subjectively, as a "one size fits all" approach may not be relevant. Also consider those with mental disabilities? surely they cannot be judged against the mental capacity of a reasonable man? therefore flexibility is required.
- Further Research in this area will help you bring out further points which you can mention.

Conclusion
- Don't introduce anything new here
- merely summarise what you've discussed in a sentence or two and then in another sentence, express your view on the matter, but be sure to back it up with your references. So for instance, "As alluded to by A, B and C, it can be seen that the general defence of duress is not fit for its intended purpose". For higher marks, you can briefly mention the perspective of someone disagreeing with you, stating how "some may disagree because of reasons D, E and F"....but then you would ultimately conclude by saying "However, it is Still not fit for purpose because of reasons G, H, and I".

Critical analysis and bringing in the perspective of those disagreeing with your point of view will help you get the higher marks, a good way of doing this would be to state a particular position of yours, and then immediately after, mention that "however, some (find a source) may disagree with this point of view because of....."

Hope that helps. I've gone pretty in depth here, and if this is an A-level question then you won't need to go as in depth with your answer as I have outlined above, as this is partly what would be expected at degree level, but seeing as I have a lot of experience in writing essays, both short and long, I have outlined the approach I would use. Based on the level you are at, you would be better placed to judge how much of this would be relevant enough for your own use.

Good luck!!
Serious respect for this answer!!
0
reply
msssmelia97
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 months ago
#4
(Original post by Knaz2020)
As a recent Law Grad, I can certainly tell you how I would go about tackling this question. The question is essentially asking you to analyse whether this particular defence is appropriate or not for its intended purpose. I would first draw up a plan and would attempt the question using the following structure:

Intro:
- Start your answer by stating exactly what it is that you will be discussing, this is effective signposting and helps the assessor marking your work to easily follow your answer from start to finish, and could lead to higher marks, particularly if your work falls between two grade boundaries.
- Define what defence of duress by circumstances/necessity is, and give some brief background information as to how it came about (remember to keep this very brief as its only a 25 marker, this should form part of the intro)
- In the intro, also make sure to point out why this defence exists, as you will use this later on in the essay when discussing if it is/isn't fit for purpose, as you will be evaluating the differing views which you can find from your research. (this is another example of signposting)

Main Body: The main chunk of the question revolves around analysing the pros and cons of this defence and then ultimately asserting your position as to this, ultimately deciding whether the defence does what it intends to do.

- find 3/4 arguments which shows that the defence of duress is not fit for purpose.
- for "circumstances" you could possibly mention how this defence is highly subjective, what one person may believe to be a circumstantial moment of duress, may not be the case for another, so there are Inconsistencies in the law. You can then support this by using the case of R v Conway, and then maybe do a little more reading around it, see what judges and academics think.
- Based on this, is this defence really a defence or is it just a loophole in the law allowing people to get away with criminal activity?

- Then find 3/4 arguments which shows that the defence of duress IS fit for purpose. (Can maybe mention fewer arguments if you have a word/time limit)
- Here you will counteract what you mentioned above, and express a view which is alternate to what has previously been stated.. For a higher mark, you should try to support these counter-arguments by referencing academics or any journal article which helps to support your view. This would go on to show that you have demonstrated critical analysis and are backing up the points you are making, as opposed to writing something along the lines of "I think this", after which you would only give your own opinion.
- You could mention how it is fit for purpose as everyone is different, and so circumstantial duress is fair as each individual can be judged subjectively, as a "one size fits all" approach may not be relevant. Also consider those with mental disabilities? surely they cannot be judged against the mental capacity of a reasonable man? therefore flexibility is required.
- Further Research in this area will help you bring out further points which you can mention.

Conclusion
- Don't introduce anything new here
- merely summarise what you've discussed in a sentence or two and then in another sentence, express your view on the matter, but be sure to back it up with your references. So for instance, "As alluded to by A, B and C, it can be seen that the general defence of duress is not fit for its intended purpose". For higher marks, you can briefly mention the perspective of someone disagreeing with you, stating how "some may disagree because of reasons D, E and F"....but then you would ultimately conclude by saying "However, it is Still not fit for purpose because of reasons G, H, and I".

Critical analysis and bringing in the perspective of those disagreeing with your point of view will help you get the higher marks, a good way of doing this would be to state a particular position of yours, and then immediately after, mention that "however, some (find a source) may disagree with this point of view because of....."

Hope that helps. I've gone pretty in depth here, and if this is an A-level question then you won't need to go as in depth with your answer as I have outlined above, as this is partly what would be expected at degree level, but seeing as I have a lot of experience in writing essays, both short and long, I have outlined the approach I would use. Based on the level you are at, you would be better placed to judge how much of this would be relevant enough for your own use.

Good luck!!
Serious respect for this answer!!
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

What factors affect your mental health the most right now?

Anxiousness about lockdown easing (152)
4.89%
Uncertainty around my education (458)
14.73%
Uncertainty around my future career prospects (347)
11.16%
Lack of purpose or motivation (433)
13.92%
Lack of support system (eg. teachers, counsellors, delays in care) (147)
4.73%
Impact of lockdown on physical health (188)
6.05%
Loneliness (268)
8.62%
Financial worries (112)
3.6%
Concern about myself or my loves ones getting/having been ill (125)
4.02%
Exposure to negative news/social media (141)
4.53%
Lack of real life entertainment (170)
5.47%
Lack of confidence in making big life decisions (277)
8.91%
Worry about missed opportunities during the pandemic (292)
9.39%

Watched Threads

View All