Exercises and (a few) Suggestions for LMR 2016

Some of the following exercises were used by LMR teachers 2008–2015.

For some topics, there are a few exercises from which to choose.

I’ve also included a couple items we considered using but did not indeed use. However,
they may suit the way you want / intend to teach.

I’ve also included a few teaching suggestions for a couple classes: may be of some use /
interest.

Note, generally: the RG refers more explicitly to LDL than had been the case previously.
That said, I must admit I often let it slide in class. I’ll try to refer to it more frequently in
2016. It’s a good background source for some matters students might find confusing (and
for some matters you don’t want to spend time on in class).
Several teachers used it quite a lot in class ...
LMR – some teaching ideas / possibilities for 2016
Class 1 – Monday: intros etc ...
* Overview, frameworks, vocabulary
* Source of law – common law: precedent, hierarchies, how to read a case
* Scene-setting / introductions
* Reading and Dissecting a case
To start: > suggestion …

Not with admin matters

Exercise: send signal to class > that they take ownership for creating their own understanding:
o
o
o
o
Maybe hand out a hypothetical problem > have them work in groups (intro
selves) and brainstorm the kinds of issues the problem raises
how the law might solve it
intro the kinds of sources of law to resolve it
how other less formal means of responding to the issues might operate

can be from own subject (PPL? DR? Obligs? Contracts? Legal Ethics? Torts? Discrim? Crim?
Human Rights Law? Int’al Law?), or any area of interest

Whatever is in your comfort zone
o
I’ve used the Rima torts-based problem, which always works well with diverse cohorts >
obviously, my comfort zone; but the problem used could be about anything …
o
Several teachers used Pip’s series of shorter exercises (or some of them)
o
and see John W’s comprehensive /wide-ranging problem
o
feel free to use whatever you feel comfortable with in terms of context, and giving the kind of
signal you want to give students in terms of group work / learning / discussion etc

point: to raise legal and non-legal issues, hear about shades of grey, discuss how sources of law
would ‘solve’ some aspects of the problem

to lead them into what the subject is about: how to use, understand, cope with and apply sources
of law > case law; statutes

I’ll have students spend at least 15 minutes on this in groups; can be in small groups

I’ll wander around seeing what they’re on about, take up responses on whiteboard

Active; comes from them ….: let students know that they’ll learn the doctrine to ‘solve’ the
problem in other subjects … we’ll be learning about the kinds of sources used to solve them >
build skills
Vocabulary
Can use the problem or series of shorter exercises to introduce some basic vocabulary


will also do this through Lynch
ie I’ll do both > reinforcement

Precedent > Common law : judge made > difficulties

Statutes > legislation > Act > difficulties

Regulations

Phrase ‘common law’ > 3 usages

Some NB differences regarding sources:



eg ad hoc / randomness of common law (need litigant)
as opposed to statutes (eg potentially comprehensive response to a problem)
needed a Ms Lynch …to find out about the legal position on issue X
Three types of exercises follow ...
After those exercises, please find additional comments on the rest of the first day’s class.
Some classes used this, from Pip - Seminar 1
Mapping Exercises
In groups, consider the following scenarios and try to work out what branch of the law they would
come under e.g. international law, contract law, property law etc. Give reasons for your
categorization.

You have just started studying at university and apply for the Youth Allowance. >>>> …

Your parents inform you …

Etc
Some classes used this – Seminar 1
Your Responses to a New Factual Scenario: How Would You Advise Rima?
In small groups, think about the following fact situation:
In April 2015, Rima, sixteen years of age, injured …. etc
Imagine that you, a newly enrolled JD student, know Rima. She is wondering what to do and
wants your advice.
1. What do you think Rima might want? (ie her ‘objectives’)
2. What do you think Rima could or should do to meet her objectives?
3. Do you think the legal system might be of assistance?





If so, how?
Do you think she will encounter any legal hurdles?
What area of law is involved?
What sources of law might help resolve her problem (if any)?
Where do they come from?
Some classes used this – Seminar 1
John’s exercises – Migration law
>>> etc >>> .
Then: discuss LMR admin

point / objectives of subject




skills based > using different areas of law to illustrate some NB points
want to develop comfort levels with reading cases and statutes
understanding their complexity
and some of the issues that will / can arise

the importance of reading

there may be some divided work > ie might not want everyone reading everything
on occasion

active classes

assessment: two assignments, graded as pass / resubmit …
Mapping
via Rima problem and / or Lynch …./ or Pip’s exercises / or John’s scenario

Domestic v international

private v public
o
tort
 negligence
o its elements
concept of a cause of action
remedy



Tort v crim
Cont v tort
etc
a few notes re Lynch v Lynch

provide advice and hints on how to read and dissect a case

lower court / appeal

court hierarchies > discuss the general way it works, aside from Lynch > this can come up
next class

parts of judgments > NB bits v less NB bits

qns in RG > NB all the time > note-taking (within reason but NB habit to develop)



Citation
Catchwords
Headnote









Parties
Actors
Material Facts
Legal Issues
Reasoning
Ratio
Obiter
Views / opinions of case / decision

Use LDL

Highlight this source of law > common law > judge made > But which part matters?
o
Consider differences between trial judgment and appeal judgment?

Can also use short (abstract) exercise on precedent Monday or Tuesday > see below

Can also use short (abstract) exercise in abstract on hierarchies Monday or Tuesday > see
below

Also watch out for how you want to set-up Tuesday, aside from more case law:
ie have all students read the Steven Rares and Keith Mason articles on the recent HC approach to
precedent and what is considered binding
Class 2 – Tuesday: the concept and use of precedent
Has come up already > more on this now
Recall Lynch > some may spill over day one
What about Dobson?
What about Bowditch lower court? What about Bowditch appeal court?

Use the series of questions in the RG

Reinforce reading and ability to dissect cases > based on what had done with Lynch > do again
with these cases

Are great differences as between Lynch and Dobson

Are subtle differences as between Lynch and Bowditch

NB: how the court in Bowditch had clear choice, and was canvassing the difference ‘out loud’ and
expressing its preferences > albeit with subtle difference in terms of ratio and what it stands for

Last part of Bowditch is very interesting in terms of maybe leaving the door open for other kinds
of claims …> will be useful in exercise / problem based on this type of issue / scenario

Emphasise > no right /wrong answer > value laden

Room for disagreement
Can we identify a ratio?
Why does it matter?
All fodder for future argument / positioning by clients, lawyers, etc

Rares and Mason (Keith): very accessible / useful pieces

Re Lynch, Dobson, Bowditch: what would happen here, in Victoria? > hypothetical problem:
reinforce court hierarchies and what binds / doesn’t bind

Also, in class, have students undertake the short written expression exercise

to be collected by teachers: it is in the RG and is included here, below
Please use this exercise, in the RG, to see if students have any obvious expression issues. If they do, please
sensitively refer them to Dr Chantal Morton. I think that this exercise is most effective if undertaken in
class time without a chance to edit it. Please try to return it within a few days, with a few comments.
LMR Exercise - Lynch, Dobson and Bowditch.
Name:
Student No:
Lecturer:
This class exercise gives you a chance to consider and reflect upon some of the issues arising in Lynch,
Dobson and Bowditch.
Having discussed these cases in class, please write a 150-200 word commentary on them, in which you
critique what they decided. Rather than focusing on the intricacies of the legal doctrine in these cases,
your commentary should express your views on the following types of matters: whether or not you
agree with the outcome in these decisions and why; whether or not you are concerned with the
implications of these decisions; etc.
Your seminar leader will collect your response and make a few comments on it. If your response
suggests that you may be having expression difficulties, you will be directed to resources offered by
the Law School to provide you with assistance.
Your response also will give your seminar leader an opportunity to see what you think about issues
that have been explored in class.
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
____________________________________
PTO if you need more space
Wednesday - unanimous HC judgment, legal writing, DVD on HC
Morning shift:

9:30 - 11:15 in class – primarily Sullivan (maybe with Mason and Kirby articles)

11:30 - 12:00 – David Derham Theatre (GM 15) with Chantal Morton
Afternoon shift:

1:30 - 3:15 in class – primarily Sullivan (maybe with Mason and Kirby articles)

3:30 - 4:00 – David Derham Theatre (GM 15) with Chantal Morton
First – in class: Sullivan

Mason (Anthony) and Kirby articles: I may leave these to students to mull over on own (or draw
it into discussion occasionally …)

Most of the class time should be spent on a close reading of Sullivan, using questions in RG

Seeing that this is students’ first exposure to an unedited HC case, I think it would be worthwhile
spending some time on its layout, aside from its content.

It also may be of importance for their assignment (which I am now writing), which they
receive 1:00 (online and in SC).

I teach this case as a literal ‘page-turn’, para by para: ie what is each para doing?

How is the judgment constructed?

Why?

When does the ‘real’ reasoning finally kick in?

Post-discussion, you may wish to use the following (by Jenny and me) as a handout, regarding the
arguable breadth of the ratio ...
Next part of Wednesday’s class: Derham Theatre: Dr Chantal Morton will introduce herself and
chat about legal writing > ??? minutes
As was noted above:
Assignment One will be available Wednesday, as of 1:00. This is the only viable release time.
Also: set up the reading for Thursday:



Cole: what to focus on
different judgments > is there a clear majority ratio?
I’d advise that all students should read all of Cole: it’s a good challenge; it alerts students to the
joys of multiple judgments!
Class 4 - Thursday
Multiple judgments in a HC case: what does the case stand for?
Please see separate attachments, sent my email, which may be of use:

Cole: empty grid to hand out in class if it suits you

Cole: filled in grid, for our internal use only; please do NOT hand out to your students

divide into groups, each with a particular judgment

work on answering the questions on the grid for their assigned judge

groups write up their ‘answers’ on A4 or A3 sheets

give a lot of time to do this - an hour perhaps?

blue-tack to the walls

then gather around the wall chart, and each group explains what their judge decided

can open up discussion as this proceeds .. ie play it by ear

seems to work well
What I’d emphasise:

In all decisions: the need to carefully go through each individual judgment to identify exactly
what each one stands for

difficulties of identifying each one’s ratio let alone difficulties identifying one for the whole case
(Cole)
And: Lisa Sarmas’ article on Storytelling; or save it for the final class.