AGLC 4 ALL AUSTRALIAN RESOURCES, INCLUDING CASE LAW AND ACADEMIC RESOURCES!
Assignment details
For this assignment, you will write an essay of 1,500 words, including footnotes but excluding the reference list, that critically reviews two law cases based on their similarities and differences.
This assignment supports unit learning outcomes 1, 2, 3, and 5.
Cases
This assignment requires you to write a critical review essay that compares and contrasts the following two cases based on their similarities and differences.
Case 1
Graham v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2017) 263 CLR 1 (judgment by Edelman J)
Case 2
Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth (2003) 211 CLR 476 (judgment by Callinan J)
Structure
The essay should include two case note sections (roughly 500 words each) and a comparison section (approximately 500 words).
Each note section should include the following:
An introduction.
A brief summary.
The questions addressed by the courts.
The legal principles enunciated in the cases (including rationes decidendi).
The courts’ decisions (including any separate judgments or dissenting opinions).
The comparison section highlights the research component of this assignment. In this section, you need to go beyond the two cases on which the assignment is based. Your research could include, for example, other cases, peer-reviewed journal articles, and even constitutional blogs such as AusPubLawLinks to an external site. (AUSPUBLAW, n.d.). Whatever resources you use, they should zero in on the evidence issues raised by the two cases.
This section should also include the following:
Your analyses of the courts’ decisions and conclusions in the two cases.
How the decisions/principles compare or contrast between the cases.
You are expected to use other authorities, including cases, outside the two given cases.
Further guidance
The introduction
As with legal academic essays, the introduction of a case should be short and functional. The introduction orientates the reader to the issues raised by the case, the court’s reasoning and the author’s opinion of the decision.
The summary
The summary should be succinct and not attempt to set out every separate opinion of dissent in extensive detail. The separate opinions and dissents should only be considered (if relevant or of particular interest) in the analytical section. You must save the majority of words for your analysis.
The analysis
The analysis should form the largest part of your case note and will be where the most marks are allocated. Here, you are evaluating the court’s reasoning. As part of that evaluation, consider whether significant factors, principles or approaches were overlooked or undervalued, whether some sources of international law or rules were given due consideration or distinguished appropriately, and whether the court’s conclusions were justified by its reasoning. You may also wish to identify significant implications of the case that go beyond the specific effects of the judgement. For instance, did the court adopt a particular approach to interpreting the law? Was this in keeping with previous cases? Is this significant? Such an evaluation goes beyond the narrow scope of the litigation whilst bearing in mind that court decisions are, as you know, binding on lower courts.
The conclusion
The conclusion should be brief and succinct, summarising your opinion and reasoning about the case. You should refrain from introducing any new material at this point in the paper.
