In the answer concerning “Rebutting the presumption” , shall i write out the facts of cases (Cox v Hickman ; Walker v Hirseh ;Re Young…) instead of just stating out the names of cases?
I can think of VERY FEW situations when writing out the facts of cases would be justified! State the principle of law and illustrate / give it authority by quoting the case name ( in brackets ). I cannot imaging that a marker / examiner would expect an answer with case “facts” quoted at length
Does it means that i’m allowed to answer an question concerning Dissolution of P/ship in this way :
“By 37(d) provides that…………., then the other partners may apply to the court for dissolution. An example may be seen in the case of (cheeseman v price).”
instead of quoting what had happened in this case?
Yes – but I am overly impressed by your apparent ability to quote me a section number!
Why not simply answer the question without feeling the necessity to quote section numbers?
I’m so sorry i do not get what u meant. Shouldn’t I include priciple of law, Acts, Sections, cases names in my answer?
Section numbers do NOT score in the exam – same as years in case law.
State the principle and illustrate it by quoting the case name. Years and section numbers? Sorry – no credit. I think I may have just destroyed a lot of your personal efforts in remembering all this detail – and that saddens me
Thanks for ur reminding^^
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.