Tertiary and Continuing The Law Thread

[Chief]

Its for our second degree, International Relations.

I dont know about straight law, but i would hope you get some electives, because all law subjects the whole time would be terrible!

We get a choice of two subjects for one elective in first semester, and again in second. They are "contextual electives", so are selected from a narrow set of law subjects. Then in second through fourth the range and number widens.

So anyway first week was partially pointless, though worth showing up for me to just get in the groove again. Lots of hand-holding for the high school leavers, big section on legal citation, using the law library etc.

 

[deeman12]

Honestly mate I think it's better being like that. It means you don't take anything lightly. I have always coasted by on my intelligence and never really put in the work unless I'm really interested in something, which is rare in itself.

At least you'll put the work in.

But I suppose a guy like you probably excels in assignments where the effort over time usually manifests in a good mark. I'm shitful at assignments unless they're group ones, because I hate letting other people down.

But exam situations are suited for me. Everyone has different learning styles, you've just got to play to your strengths and improve on your weaknesses.

And besides, everyone is afraid of failing - why do you think I've been thinking of doing Law for like 3 or 4 years but only finally set the DULSAT in 2009? I finally stopped being worried about failing or what other people thought of me - life is too short for being scared. Just do what you want to do and **** everyone else.

Wise words KP. Much appreciated mate. Luckily I have a solid mixture of assignments, presentations and exams, so I'll have a wide net to draw marks from.

Good for you that you sat and passed the DULSAT. Best of luck with your degree. I'm sure you'll do well with your attitude.

 

[AndyLesPaul]

Considering doing Arts/Law

I have the choice of 98.15 at Monash
or 95.5 at ANU

I live in Melbourne

Big choice here.

 

[rick James]

Considering doing Arts/Law

I have the choice of 98.15 at Monash
or 95.5 at ANU

I live in Melbourne

Big choice here.

Monash is probably the best in Melbourne. The Melbourne JD program has a bad rep at the moment.

You'll make friend anywhere you go though, so look at it purely from a career/facilities point of view imo.

BTW: Two days into O-Week and have been boozing it most of the time. Been to one party and two BBq's so far and another two parties scheduled by Saturday. Deakin rules.

 

[Krakeour Magic]

I am seriously considering beefing up my arsenal with a law degree.

The hard part is sitting through all the mundane crap.

 

[hilly]

BTW: Two days into O-Week and have been boozing it most of the time. Been to one party and two BBq's so far and another two parties scheduled by Saturday. Deakin rules.

Seems like a relatively light load

 

[rick James]

Seems like a relatively light load

It's O-Week, classes haven't even started yet. I'm wagging today.

 

[rick James]

Ok so we're still in first week and its been pretty slow so far. But just looking at all the reading we're going to be doing, I'm a bit confused/intimidated by the thought of trying to condense all this info down into exam notes.

For MLL110 we've got some pissy assignments including a Library tutorial or something (not sure on the details starts next week). And a referencing quiz worth 5% of our marks. I'm pretty sure this week is meant to be very slow anyway, but it's bordering on inane for anybody whose done any kind of tertiary study before. Not just for Law either, for both my Arts subjects its been pretty similar.

Contract Law just looks insane as far as the volume of reading material.

Any advice from the 2nd or 3rd year Law students out there? I'm trying to get my head around what kind of thing I should be doing in my own time. I've just been reading like crazy, and I've created a template for my case summaries - but I haven't really got stuck into the summaries yet - am I trying to do too much too soon?

Should I relax a bit and wait for the tutorials to really get into full swing next week?

 

[jo172]

Don't bother with any of the Contracts cases except Walton Stores. Everything else will be adequately explained by text book, tutors and lectures. Just so you know the basic case behind each principle and you can skirt by with minimal readings.

 

[chenyan]

You're probably panicking too soon. MLL110 assignments are just easy marks so that not many people fail. Easy as ABC, can do them in one sitting.

Contract is harder. Dedicated notes are the key. You can read each case in the giant casebook, but summarise each case after reading down to a few sentences and put it into your notes. Structured, concise notes will get you a good mark.

As far as the suggested readings go, for Law, Society I would read 1 or 2 a week and summarise them. Highlight important phrasings, etc. This is because the exam will typically pick an issue covered by a reading or two and ask for an essay. Annotated, on point notes will thus translate to a faster and better response in the exam.

 

[nylexbandit]

Dont let the knockers deter you Rick. I'm sure you'll be dealing with petty theft and conveyancing matters in no time

Hahaha nicely done mate.

In terms of worrying about reading cases etc my advice (5th/final year student having done Com/Law and being just off 1st class honours in law at this moment):

DON'T READ THE CASES!!!!!!!!

I have still not fully read a case, apart from when i was working at a firm over summer, and only really read case extracts once I was doing electives.

You really do not need to unless you really cannot understand the case based on what you are told/textbooks say. Even the case extracts you'll generally encounter need only a cursory glance to see the key principles.

My way of study for law summaries (granted it won't be everyone's cup of tea but it worked for me) is:
- Start with your lecturer's notes (literally copy and paste)- many will
have all the info on the cases/ general principles that you need
- Then have a peek at other lecturer's notes and incorporate any extra
info you think relevant
- Any cases or principles you feel are a bit bare in your notes or you
don't understand properly have a look at a sketch notes book or any
fairly simple textbook and incorporate that info in
- only if not certain still have a look at the case extract/case to see if
it sheds further light- reading the cases should really be a last
resort- I have no idea what this means- or - I have heaps of time on
my hands and I think it will improve my knowledge- kind of thing

With something like contracts there are so many textbooks etc out there that there is no need to read the cases to get anything extra. Anything of substance is already put into textbooks/ lecturers notes and the only thing you may miss (although it's very likely that a lecturer or tute will reveal these anyway) are bits of obiter that may influence the direction in future cases. Trust me when i say the time spend reading cases will not add that much onto your mark and may only make you more confused, as many cases will incorporate other areas of law and will just confuse you.

While my system may sound time consuming it really isn't. It only gets more like that for later year electives where there's less academic writing on the subjects thus the amount of textbooks and case extracts you need to read and put into notes is increased.

While this won't work for everyone I have had so much time to get on the sauce etc while uni mates complain they're stuck studying it is ridiculous. Let me reiterate again DO NOT READ THE CASES!!!

 

[rick James]

Ok, after the second lecture for contract its making more sense.

The lecturer seems to basically summarise the cases FOR ME. I just need to take note of the key points and resolutions that come up. I'm doing all the readings required etc. but mainly, I'm just copying and pasting my lecturers slides into my own case summaries which will form my notes. I've noticed the kids that have read WAY too much into the cases, asking naff questions that mean nothing. I'm going to stick with the method of:

1. Don't slack off, make sure I get a few case summaries done each week and follow the key points my lecturer brings up

2. Don't get too carried away with learning details, focus on the big points, and the lecturer basically spells it out for me anyway.

3. There are no points for asking stupid questions or thinking I'm smarter than the lecturer or the cases. Just make sure I take the RIGHT notes, not the most detailed ones.

I'll see how this plays out, but I'm really loving Contract Law now.

It's really strange, in my arts electives the tutorials seem way more important than the lectures, and in my law subjects its the opposite.

 

[deeman12]

Does it get easier to analyse a case over time? I've read over a couple of cases and for the life of me, I can hardly distinguish the obiter from the ratio. Does this get easier?

I'm doing a VCAT case for my case brief assignment, so maybe obiter and ratio aren't as apparent as they would be in a standard court case. But still.

Any advice?

 

[watermelonslice]

Does it get easier to analyse a case over time? I've read over a couple of cases and for the life of me, I can hardly distinguish the obiter from the ratio. Does this get easier?

I'm doing a VCAT case for my case brief assignment, so maybe obiter and ratio aren't as apparent as they would be in a standard court case. But still.

Any advice?

It does get a lot easier IMO. I remember trying to read Mabo in my first semester at law school, and I basically ended up highlighting every word because I thought it was all important. (Although, I'm sure someone out there will argue that every word of Mabo has some significance or another.)

If you're really lost, I advise you to have a look at discussion points/questions listed in the reading guide (assuming there is an equivalent at whichever uni you're studying). Those will give you some guidance as to what you should be looking out for in the particular cases.

 

[Chief]

It's really strange, in my arts electives the tutorials seem way more important than the lectures, and in my law subjects its the opposite.

That you're doing arts electives in first year is strange to me all up.

With mine the tutorials are more important than the lectures. The lecturers post Powerpoint files and, later on, recordings of the lectures so you don't even need to go. Just subscribe to the podcast and listen o the bus.

The tutorials count for 15%-20% of each subject so not going is just a waste of marks. The tutorials are also where you get the meat of the subject: what the questions on the exam will be like. There's at least two or three cases the Contracts tutor has hammered home that have not been mentioned in the lectures either at all or at most the names alone with no background.

Different institutions have different methods I suppose.

Cases make more sense if you at least read a summary of the main ones. You get two or three a week that are the really seminal cases or the latest cases on the area being discussed. At least Googling for a summary is easy and it takes no time to read a page or so. I make a few points about each that relate to the area.

So for a minor one in Conversion:

Hunter BNZ Finance v ANZ Banking Group [1990]
Drawer of cheque
retains possession until it reaches payee
Payee
may take action in conversion after receipt

Or maybe:

Kirk v Gregory (1876)
def moved goods from one room to another
-goods disappeared
-liable for trespass, but not loss
-nominal damages

But your main ones, like Carlill and others, you keep a few notes on the story to help your recall. So many of the questions are based on the main cases each week, with a few facts changed or merged with another case that covers the points raised. So knowing the outline of the story means you can match it up off the top of your head - it really does start to leap out at you which cases they are mimicking.

Going out of your way to be 'smart' and not have a bit of a look through the main cases may end up biting you on the arse - or not. Right now there's a new case that was decided earlier this year regarding contracts and email. It isn't in any text and isn't in the lecture notes. The tutor has said: "It's 50 pages long but read it." She hasn't said what it actually contains, but sure as shit it will be on the exam.

many cases will incorporate other areas of law and will just confuse you.

This is true as well, but I've found I can ignore those bits and zoom in on the main point relating to the area we're covering.

That's what works for me. The human brain mostly likes stories while strings of facts are less readily absorbed.

Although I may hit the exams and blow it all, realising the above method is rubbish.

Anyway I'm behind in my torts study so bye for now

 

[Chief]

The hard part is sitting through all the mundane crap.

Dude, it is 90% mundane crap.

 

[Ellis2WeightsRoom]

Going out of your way to be 'smart' and not have a bit of a look through the main cases may end up biting you on the arse - or not. Right now there's a new case that was decided earlier this year regarding contracts and email. It isn't in any text and isn't in the lecture notes. The tutor has said: "It's 50 pages long but read it." She hasn't said what it actually contains, but sure as shit it will be on the exam.

[ ] This case is likely to actually be on the exam.
[x] Lecturers say this type of crap every year.

In my experience shit hits the fan (all of it landing on faculty) when cases are examined that aren't in the lecture notes/set text/reading guides.

On the off chance your lecturer gets tricky and includes this case, it will probably be allocated a minuscule number of marks anyway, meaning that the time you would have spent reading it would be better spent drumming into your head basic principles, and learning how to apply said principles to foreseeable factual scenarios.

Wait until someone asks a stupid question over your uni's internet discussion board after spending five hours trying to read it.
The lecturer (or another more competent student) will then tell you in 2 sentences all you need to know about that 'vital case' and you will get your 2 bonus marks .

 

[Impunity!]

You embryo lawyers are so CUTE!

Keep at it chaps and one day you will breathe the rarefied air I breathe.

 

[thegrach]

Haha, how is the falconry going reep?

 

[Colin D'Cops]

Went to visit the Supreme court today with the school, and some guy was accused of killing someone with a hammer; and then setting fire to the then dead body.

The defence lawyer said it had little to do with him, but to do with his girlfriend and some other bloke. At the start he was mumbling like a tool, and so it got me thinking..., 'Damn, I have to listen to this DHead for another hour or so.' He smartened up though, was a croaky beginning which didn't sound convincing at all. Was a dispute over drugs I think. The defence barrister was quoting sentences from the statements, and he said 'f***' about a dozen times. Haha. The judge was Betty King apparently, which was the judge that sentenced big boy Carl Williams. Interesting stuff.

 

[Impunity!]

Haha, how is the falconry going reep?

I am now so senior that I delegate the falconry to my trainee solicitors.

 

[Chief]

[ ] This case is likely to actually be on the exam.
[x] Lecturers say this type of crap every year.

There was nothing said. Just a whole lot of pointing and writing the name of the case on the white board by all of the tutors.

I know four people who have done law at QUT in the past - they say this all means you should go in knowing that specific case. They also say take in the Q&A book because the course coordinator wrote it, and he sets the exams. It is not unknown for an exam to include a question lifted right from that book

Wait until someone asks a stupid question over your uni's internet discussion board

Pfft... who reads discussion boards? They are sooooo 1999.

after spending five hours trying to read it.

50 pages takes you 5 hours to read?

Anyhoo, found a great summary of it. All good.

 

[Impunity!]

What the hell would you know about law?

It keeps me in swan foie gras

 

[Ellis2WeightsRoom]

I know four people who have done law at QUT in the past - they say this all means you should go in knowing that specific case.

Knowing the case and reading the case are two very different things.

Anyhow, good job finding a summary and not bothering to read it

You're learning well.

 

[rick James]

Got two full sets of contract law notes. Haven't read them yet, because if I go too far ahead I'll just get confused.

Found 2 websites that have full case summaries of every case we've looked at so far which is handy.

**** reading the cases, I'm just reading other peoples summaries, then trying to explain it in one sentence in my own words. Add the two together, plus a few key cut and pastes from the lecture notes, and there are my own personal exam notes.

I'm still doing all the prescribed reading, and the weekly tutorial questions (because they seem to be preparing me for the Assignment, and I imagine the exam as well).

It's still pretty confusing really, I wouldn't feel confident trying to do an exam, hell, I haven't even started the assignment. But I'm slowly getting there and I figure they wouldn't expect us to know exactly what we're doing three weeks in.

Will be happy with just passing Contract Law at this rate.