LSU Writing and Referencing Law Assignments 2

7/14/2019 LSU Writing and Referencing Law Assignments 2

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lsu-writing-and-referencing-law-assignments-2 1/25

!

! "

#

! $%##

! $%"

! $#

! ## $

#

&

!"#$$% %&'()*++),))+-+.+)/

0(0!'-#$$%1&*++),))++2+2)/

0)

$''$%($$%)$'#'#*

+,-)./01234&5 +&/00316/01718



AIC:LSU Student Resource: Writing & Referencing Law Assignments This document is uncontrolled when printedLast Updated: 22 January, 2007

Last printed: 2/1/2007 5:28 PM Page 2 of 25

'3)0,)0 4 1 5 )1)"

• ,6

• ,6

• 6

• 6

• 6

• )





-&5 '%9)7 )8)

5 ) 5

''

0"&5)9)

-1:;+,#"$'$9" 4 , %*/4

-')0)'-

) - )")

,)

Note: Dividing the question into its parts ensures all partsof the question are answered. This also helps to define the

tasks that have to be achieved by the end of the assignment.

Note: The five steps are:

1. Examine the question2. Research the question3. Write the law case

study answer (usingthe IRAC system)

4. Edit and proofread5. Write a bibliography





&)$9#"<4

&)$9' &#"<")

'

)

:4 ) 0 4 )

()

5 )

-3;;+,

" * / ) 5 *);</)5 *) 7/)$#=)#

=/ ")5#*>/)

#/ 9>%<)04,)

>/ <" >%< %

()5.75),)

Note: After carefully examining the question (in Step 1), lessreading is required to find relevant information as you shouldhave a much clearer idea of the type of information you need.





?/ % * /) 0 5 *++)))/ '4@45 * /)53)

9/ *;)</)

5-A,)

$#

• -6

• .,*B1C)0/6

• (+6

• 6

• &6

• "+)-7&?-)0*0-#$$%/)5,):6)0

• "6

• -*/)

(Mainintroduction)

Issue 1

Relevant Law

Application of these Laws

Conclusion

Issue 2

Relevant Law

Application of

these Laws

Conclusion

Issue 3

Relevant Law

Application of these Laws

Conclusion

(Mainconclusion)





4;"<

*=/7' -)*#/7' -<D)

)

• "6

• @+6

• "6

• -6

• (*/)

Facts to think about:

• Sue borrowed a lawnmower which was old and did not have a safety guard(the safety guard may have been lost or the lawn mower may never have hadone);

• Sue was warned to wear safety glasses because stray stones might fly into hereyes;

• Sue forgot to wear safety glasses and was hit in the eye by a stone.

Note: Do not make very basic orintroductory statements. Avoidgiving long, in-depth definitions(eg. the definition of a contract) orgeneral overviews (eg. the history of a law). Students only get markswhen they start to answer thequestion.





4;&'<

)" 6 3) "

'4-)" *'/ *-/ ! B=EFGC#=-5-&=)

7*1/)

''#$

• ,6

• :4)

4;5'<

''#$'- < ) H - )- '< ) 0 D)

7*1/)

• 6

• -6

Note: The law may not provide an immediate, complete

answer. You may have to develop an argument based onthe facts of the case and how the existing laws might applyto them. This argument is called a proposition.

Note: Think about what is themost likely outcome. Do nottalk about all possibleoutcomes. Students will stillget marks for coming up with aconclusion, even if it is not thebest conclusion.





• - + )06

• )

4;<

5 ! B=EFGC #=-5-&= '- ) " '-<D)

7 *1/)

-4&&-,,&

• 5,6

• 0+6

• 06

• )-8@@,-;?-1)





-@?'3)1)5<)

9 ) :7)-1:;+,#"$'$9"4,%*/4

7'''' ())IJ-))

,)

&)$9#"<4

&)$9'' &#"<7 '' '' ( ) )J

(4 ())( 4 ))0

'' '') ( ;< JH '' '' J")

Note: Dividing the question into its partsensures all parts of the question areanswered. This also helps to define the

tasks that have to be achieved by the endof the assignment.

Note: The five steps are:

1. Examine the question2. Research the question3. Write the essay4. Edit and proofread5. Write a bibliography





H ''J

0 4 () ) J 5 J0

;<)

- ))

- K + )7 ) " J 7 ,J

-3;;+,$#=)#" * / ) 5 *);</)5 *)

7/)

=/ ")5#*>/)

#/ 9>%<)04

,)

>/ <" >%< % ()5.75),)

?/ % * /) 0 5 *++)))/ '4@45 * /)53)

9/ *;)</)

5-A,)

Note: After carefully examining the question (in Step 1), lessreading is required to find relevant information. You should thenhave a much clearer idea of the type of information you need.





$#

• -6

• .,*B1C)0/6

• +6

• 6

• &6

• "+)-7;?

5 D " )- , *0#$$%/)5

• .6

• (6

• -6

• '+6

• 6

• , *#$$%/)

Note: Even though the introduction of an essay appearsbefore the body, the introduction should not be writtenuntil the body has been drafted or completed.





4

"4D)" )0

=D;3 <)# H #$ # % # &'(( )!* * #+ # &'(( / D,D)>

7 *1/)

$%"

• "6

• .

o (6o ( ,

+6

o :+6o .+)

)0)

(

- " * /

+ * /6

Note: By following a timesequence of events, the body canbe organised in a logical way.

Note: A paragraph is the best place for an argumentbecause each paragraph should contain one main pointthat is expressed through a group of sentence where thesentences flow and link to each other (UTS 2006).

Note: Finding evidence that supports your mainpoints/arguments can be tricky as it involves

interpreting the law and applying the law.





3 546

- 5*+/6

- : *

/)

(

- - )

• 0 )

4

,:4D)?"=EEF4H,-.:4;<)9@ :4L ) 5 D )0

D) 7 *1/)





• +6

• )

4

7 D #? ,)#90:4 D )L

:4)0 :4 D D ! !$$%/#%H:44D)#F

7

*1/)

-4&&-,,&

• 5,6

• 0+6

• 06

• )-8@@,-;?-1)





-,,, ,*3H&/)1#$$# #0! ' & 5 ")

++))))+1(+2)AB;@,,,,$# ) ;<)"$$

• +I,6

• -'$I6• #>I "

)##MN,4

1. $$ ,4*/6

2. " & "6

3. 0 ) : ) 6) ;,+<*=G/6 ) 5)

4

Exemplary damages are imposed alongside general damages to punish thewilful and malicious misconduct of another party. These damages are notawarded in contract cases, as in the case of Addis v Gramophone Co Ltd .1 However, exemplary damages are available in tort cases.2 …

1 [1909] AC 488 493.2

See, eg, XL Petroleum (NSW) Pty Ltd v Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty Ltd (1985) 155 CLR 448.Obviously, the exclusion of contract greatly reduces the ambit of operation of exemplarydamages.

Footnote numbers in

the assignment body

Footnotes at the bottomof the page

A footnote that provides

extra information





A%B,,,;@,&?$9*>/-,,*);</)

9*?/',

• "6

• "O)"=#==,)

'4>,)

#$

• 8 < ;< ;<;(<;1<;0H<6

• ;<*;!</)

• ;<)

The Federal Government intends to ‘restrict access to judicial review in visa-

related matters to all but exceptional circumstances’.3

His Honour said:

In this respect it should be emphasised that the directors of a company must takeaccount of the interest of its shareholders and its creditors. Any failure by thedirectors to take into account the interests of creditors will have adverseconsequences for the company.4

Dr Richard Kreindler et al argue that as cross-border transactions become morecommon, purchase price adjustments will become more complex and difficult toresolve.6 …6 Richard Kreindler et al, ‘Cross-Border Purchase Price Adjustment Provisions’ (2005) 8 The

Journal of Private Equity 82, 83.

Charles Sampford, Rodney Smith and A J Brown believe corruption can bereduced by the institutionalisation of integrity.5 …5 Charles Sampford, Rodney Smith and A J Brown, ‘From Greek Temple to Bird's Nest’ (2005)64 Australian Journal of Public Administration 96, 96.

Note: In the footnote, format names of authors as you do in the body, but exclude

titles, such as ‘Dr’, ‘Mr’, ‘Mrs’ and ‘Ms’.





AB,,,;,,-0)" C)

• D D) "4 =#>*=>9 /)

• *'&/) " 4 =$?)

-'#0 ' % )")

• 7 ()

• ")#$

" 3*6/)

See, eg, Addis v Gramophone Co Ltd [1909] AC 488; Butler v Fairclough (1917) 23CLR 78, 89.

18Theophanus v Herald & Weekly Times Ltd (1994) 182 CLR 104, 113.

17 James Liddle et al, ‘The Role of Lawyers in Domestic Violence Cases’ (2001) 45 Melbourne Law Review 123, 135.

19 Friedrich Juenger, ‘Tort Choice of Law in a Federal System’ (1997) 19 Sydney Law

Review 529, 529.

Cubillo v Commonwealth (2000) 174 ALR 97, 267, 449, 452.





%9D##$#0 ;"< ; < +, )%

;"<* /

• " $ )0%

")

• 5$

;<)0

"1&)

%)

0%) 5 <-@1&);5< * /

• " 6

• N$ )

15 Matthew Collins, ‘Democratic Issues’ (1983) 3 American Politics 245; VictorThuronyi (ed), Tax Law Design and Drafting (1998) vol 2, 495.16 Thuronyi, above n 15, 496.

10 Matthew Collins, ‘Democratic Issues’ (1983) 3 American Politics 245.11 Ibid 246.

8 Michael Coper and George Williams (eds) Power, Parliament and the People (1997)91.9 Ibid.

12 Olaf Sanders, An Explanation of Political Theory (1972) 32.13 International Narcotics Control Board, Annual Report 1999 (1999) [176].14 Sanders, above n 12, 37.

Note: This is the number of thefootnote you are referring to.





AB,,,&,;,,0 ) 0 )1*D@<D'

ACB0 (5<.@+"P-;05-<*8/Q@ 1-151&)

@<

• ";*/<;*/<6

• " :@ ;*/< 1

8)0%<5<.@+"P-2-1*:@18/1&)

Friedrich Juenger, ‘Tort Choice of Law in a Federal System’ (1997) 19 Sydney Law Review 529, 540.22 A S Lynton, B Green and L S Myalls, ‘Contemporary Issues in Tort Liability’ (1998)43 Current Legal Problems 320, 323.

23 P L Karcher, International Law Cases (2nd ed, 1999) 23.24 Peter Birks (ed), Wrongs and Remedies in the Twenty-First Century (1996) 93.





3*AB0!3$1 *8/Q@ &--11&)

")

-E

0 <

)H

• 7 6

• N; <6

• 7)

#'-#=)

?

• */6

• ,BC)

7*

Koop v Bebb (1951) 84 CLR 629, 685.

30General Newspapers Pty Ltd v Telstra Corporation (1993) 45 FCR 164, 172.

31Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Vogt [1975] 1 NSWLR 194, 216.

In News Corporation v Lenfast Communications Inc,26 the Supreme Court of NewSouth Wales had to consider the effect of foreign pending proceedings.

…26 (1966) 21 ACSR 553, 557.

The assignment bodyThe footnote(without case name)

25 R v Hughes (2000) 202 CLR 535, 548.





04#5+01 61 *5L/1&)

4* " * : " :/ #0!

++))))+1(+2))

03$1+1 0-1&(:)

8*,$ N - 1 ( & &1 #0!

++))))+1(+2)*7+7/

0

5<.@+"P-+$1*8/7@R&'S(&)

• ''39 Jason Lau, International Law and Human Rights (2001) Centre for Law Research<http://www.clr.edu.au/pubs/InternatLaw.html> at 11 January 2003.

32

Trustee Act 1962 (WA) s 90.33Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) ss 20, 43.

34 Aboriginal Land Rights Regulations 1996 (NSW) reg 23 (a).

35Australian Constitution s 51(xxix).

36The Antarctic Treaty, opened for signature 1 December 1959, 402 UNTS 71, art 7(2)

(entered into force 23 June 1961).37

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, opened for signature 10 December

1982, 1833 UNTS 3 (entered into force 16 November 1994).





''0''5<.@+"P-;05<3$3% *11/(1&)

• 5*)-/)

• *)("/)

40 Ellen Connolly, ‘Strapped for Cash: Man Gets $2.5m for a 1984 Caning’, Sydney

Morning Herald (Sydney), 15 February 2001, 1.

General Formatting Tips for Law Assignments

• Words within the assignment may be italicised for added emphasis;

• Case names, statute titles and titles of material (such as journal articles)should be italicised;

• Use neutral, non sexist words (instead of ‘chairman’, use ‘chairperson’);

• Use third person singular to refer to a person (‘he’, ‘she’, ‘he or she’);

• Use third person plural to refer to a number of people (eg. ‘they’, ‘their’or ‘them’).

Abbreviations for Law Assignments

When a party is a corporation or a firm, the following abbreviations should

be used:• ‘&’ for ‘and’, ‘Co’ for ‘Company’, ‘Ltd’ for ‘Limited’, ‘Pty’ for

‘Proprietary’, ‘Inc’ for ‘Incorporated’ and ‘(in liq)’ instead of ‘(inliquidation)’.

If the pinpoint reference is to a statute (not a page number), the referenceshould be appropriately abbreviated:

• art = article, para = paragraph, paras = paragraphs, reg = regulation,s = section, ss = sections, sub-s = subsection, sub-ss = subsections,sch = schedule, schs = schedules.

Abbreviate the form of jurisdiction for Legislation:

• Cth – Commonwealth, NSW – New South Wales, Vic – Victoria,ACT – Australian Capital Territory, QLD – Queensland, SA – SouthAustralia, WA – Western Australia, NT – Northern Territory,Tas – Tasmania.

29 James Hardie & Co Pty Ltd v Hall (1998) 43 NSWLR 554, 558.





AB@@,-;?

• 5 @%'$"=6

• 0=) 5++&

#) '>) '?) 09) N-*)77@5/

• "6

• " )46

• 54)"< # * / < )0)

Bibliography

1. Articles/Books/Reports

Marlowe, T, ‘Parliamentary Debates on the Australian Constitution’ (2001) 3 Federal

Law Review 231

Pride, Frank, Human Rights and Foreign Policy (3rd ed, 2003)

2. Case Law

Commissioner of Tasmania v Vogt [1975] 1 NSWLR 194

Coober v Pedder (1999) 72 CLR 398

3. Legislation

Australian Constitution

Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)

4. Treaties

Convention on the Rights of the Child , opened for signature 20 November 1989, 1588UNTS 530 (entered into force 16 January 1991)

5. Other Sources

Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 17 August 2000





A#B--,?;,,,

assignment body

…The court judicially reviews the unlawfulness of a decision of an administrative naturemade under an enactment.1 Judicial review happens when the repository of public

power has breached the limits placed upon the grant of that power.2 The practical needfor precise categorisation of the common law grounds for judicial review remainunclear. Not only are there nine overlapping categories, but also further identificationis diminished by the fact that most challenges to the exercise of federal administrativepower are made on both ADJR Act and common law grounds.3

In recent decades, the courts have significantly extended the scope of judicial reviewand have made marked changes to the rules of natural justice (or procedural fairness),as well as to the extension of judicial review to pure administrative decisions and notmerely quasi-judicial decisions. According to Justice Sackville,4 the courts haveextended judicial review because they believe that they need to fill ‘a gap’ created bythe failure of political forms of accountability to provide redress to individualsadversely affected by government decisions.

a footnote number

The increased willingness of the courts to intervene in administrative matters, evenwhere policy factors predominate, and the judiciary’s reputation of underminingExecutive power and interfering with policy decisions beyond their scope have led totensions between the Executive and Judiciary. These tensions have escalated to theextent that Federal and State agencies do not always follow judicial or quasi-judicialrulings and have, on occasions, even openly undermined decisions, as seen in TaxationRuling IT2612.5

The judicial bench should not have continued to review the merits6 but adhered toreviewing only the legality of administrative decisions, and should also have monitoredthe abuse of the system more closely, if the rule of law is to remain the basis of democracy, the courts can, in turn, not be moved by the political consequences of theirdecisions but must maintain an apolitical stance.7

footnotes

_____________________________1 Ian Ellis-Jones, Essential Administrative Law, (1997) 110. ‘The word ‘decision’ is not in itself defined in the Act’...however ‘the interpretation of making a decision or a deemed decision areaddressed in 3(2) and 3(8)’.

2 Aronson and Dyer, Judicial Review of Administrative Action (2nd ed, 2000), 3. Australiancourts, for the most part continue to classify the review in fairly classical terms, viz, proceduralfairness (or natural justice), ultra vires and jurisdictional error.

3The ADJR sits side by side with the CL. At a state level the ADJR is a Commonwealth Act

and so only applies to the exercise of power pursuant to a Commonwealth Act. To challenge anact pursuant to a State Act must rely on the common law (no NSW equivalent to ADJR).

4 Sackville, ‘The Limits of Judicial Review of Executive Action – Some Comparisons betweenAustralia and the United States’ (2000) 28 Federal Law Review 315, 317.

5Pearce, ‘Executive Versus Judiciary’ (1991) 2 Public Law Review 179, 190.

6 Shergold v Tanner [2002] HCA 19.7

Hon Justice McHugh AC, ‘Tensions between the Executive and the Judiciary’, Paper presentedat the Australian Bar Association Conference, Paris, 10 July 2002. ‘Judges cannot base theirdecisions on, or be affected by potential political implications and media pressures…but mustbase their decisions on the law’.



@%'$" '&5 " #$$# #

0! #'&5)

#$$% ;- 7 '<7890

0: >L#$$%++)))+++++3+#)4)0 #$$% ;7 ' :

<87 =9#$$%++))))+++2+72'2:2)

)

0 *0-/ #$$% ;. : 7< 8 49840#, >L#$$%++))))+++))

Date post:	29-Oct-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	jack-ding
View:	352 times
Download:	53 times

LSU Writing and Referencing Law Assignments 2

Documents