The following extract is from a newspaper article. It contains errors. Today is the start of Brendan’s civil action against Henry in the Supreme Court. Brendan is claiming $3000 for breach of contract. Henry, the plaintiff, is strongly denying any liability. In court Brendan must prove his case beyond reasonable doubt to the judge.

Photo AI

The following extract is from a newspaper article - VCE - SSCE Legal Studies - Question 4 - 2010 - Paper 1

Question 4

The following extract is from a newspaper article. It contains errors. Today is the start of Brendan’s civil action against Henry in the Supreme Court. Brendan is cl... show full transcript

Worked Solution & Example Answer:The following extract is from a newspaper article - VCE - SSCE Legal Studies - Question 4 - 2010 - Paper 1

Step 1

Error: Brendan claiming $3000 in the Supreme Court.

96%

114 rated

Answer

The claim for this amount should likely be heard in the Magistrates' Court, as the amount in dispute does not exceed $100,000. Therefore, the correct procedure is that Brendan's case is likely to be heard in the Magistrates' Court.

Step 2

Error: Henry is identified as the plaintiff.

99%

104 rated

Answer

In this context, Brendan is actually the plaintiff since he is the one taking action against Henry. Thus, the correct definition is: Brendan is the plaintiff in this civil action.

Step 3

Error: Brendan proving his case beyond reasonable doubt to the judge.

96%

101 rated

Answer

Brendan must prove his case on the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt, as this is the standard of proof in civil cases. Hence, the correct process is that Brendan will need to prove his case based on the balance of probabilities.

Join the SSCE students using SimpleStudy...

97% of Students

Report Improved Results

98% of Students

Recommend to friends

100,000+

Students Supported

1 Million+

Questions answered

;