courts, parliament, criminal law, civil law

Question 1

how does parliament affect courts?

Answer 1

Parliamentary supremacy (sovereignty)
Establishing the courts
Statutory interpretation

Question 2

what happened with the studded belt case?

Answer 2

the definition of a weapon was too broad so they narrowed it to something that was used with aggressive intent.

Question 3

what happened in the Kevin and Jennifer case?

Answer 3

the meaning of man was narrow and outdated so it was broadened so it included trans men.

Question 4

how do courts affect parliament?

Answer 4

comments: on existing and statute law
high profile cases: get a lot of attention, often making the public question / want to change a certain law.
codification: of common law, which changes common law into legislation to make it become statute law.
abrogation: of common law is when parliament decides a law made by the court (common law) isnt good / useful so they render it invalid.
invalidation: of statute law is when the courts enforce the division of law-making powers between states and the commonwealth parliament. the courts decision is binding and cant be abrogated.

Question 5

criminal law purpose

Answer 5

to protect society from harm and to punish those who offend against our basic values, usually by harming or threatening to harm another.

Question 6

party bringing the case in criminal law

Answer 6

prosecution (police or DPP)

Question 7

party defending the case in criminal law

Answer 7

accused

Question 8

party responsible for proving the case in criminal law

Answer 8

prosecution

Question 9

outcome of the action in criminal law

Answer 9

sanction if the accused is found guilty(or pleads guilty) the judge will impose a sentence in accordance to the severity of the crime.

Question 10

purpose of civil law

Answer 10

to provide individuals and organisations the right to seek a remedy if someone harms their individual rights.

Question 11

types of civil infringements

Answer 11

negligence, nuisance, trespass, defamation

Question 12

party bringing the case in civil law

Answer 12

plaintiff

Question 13

party defending the case in civil law

Answer 13

defendant

Question 14

party responsible for proving the case in civil law

Answer 14

plaintiff

Question 15

outcome of the action in civil law

Answer 15

remedy if the defendant is found to be liable for infringing on the rights of the plaintiff, the plaintiff will be awarded a remedy as compensation.

Question 16

original and appellate jurisdiction

Answer 16

original: can hear a case for the first time
appellate: can hear a case on appeal

Question 17

criminal and civil jurisdiction

Answer 17

criminal: can hear criminal cases
civil: can hear civil cases

Question 18

high court jurisdiction

Answer 18

only deals with constitutional matters, disputes between states, disputes in which the commonwealth is a party and appeals from the supreme court

Question 19

supreme court jurisdiction
(also supreme court - court of appeal)

Answer 19

criminal: trials for most serious indictable offences
civil: unlimited but usually hears claims greater than $100,000 or multiple people.
Hears appeals on questions of the law.
court of appeal hears appeals from the county court and supreme court - trial division

Question 20

county court jurisdiction

Answer 20

criminal: trials for most indictable offences and hears appeals from magistrates.
civil: unlimited trials but usually over $100,000. no civil appeals

Question 21

magistrates jurisdiction

Answer 21

criminal: minor criminal offences and pre trial hearings. no appellate
civil: claims up to $100,000. no appellate

Question 22

reasons for the vic courts hierarchy

Answer 22

specialisation: expertise in specific types of cases. it leads to more accurate outcomes
administrative convenience: separating minor offences and disputes from indictable, expensive and time consuming cases. this means superior courts can devote more time and resources to longer, more complex cases to stop the court being clogged up by. minor disputes. it also means the lower courts can resolve a large number of minor cases quickly.
appeals: a request to superior courts to review or alter a previous decision made by a lower court. this gives people a chance to point out flaws.
the doctrine of precedent: legal mechanism by which decisions made in higher courts are followed, in future, by lower courts with similar cases. this ensures consistency, predictability and justice.