Matthew Silvers pleaded guilty in Scandalous Magistrate’s court yesterday to dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm…. ” “Although Silvers, 34, was charged with causing his former partner Vanessa De Barb serious Injury…. ” Tort Law The law of tort Is concerned with the Intentionally or being negligence of hurting from one person to another person. In the article stated, “Mr. Magistrate Brian Glutens said that “The crash was probably a momentary lap” In concentration.
These shows that Mr. Silvers being negligence on the road, as he never put full attention while driving. Administrative Law Mr. Silvers never follows the driving rules and regulation that has been set from he government as his driving attitude threaten the social security on the road. Therefore he deserve for two years driving suspension and an $8000 fine punishment from the court. Question 2: (l) Allows people to organize and plan. Mr. Silvers action show that he never organizes and plan on the road, causing former partner Ms Vanessa De Barb serious Injury.
Knowing law Is everyone responsibility. By law, people should know what they can do and cannot do. Therefore people able to do the right things In organizing and planning to practice the right and follow the rules and regulation. In this article Mr. Silverware’s behavior is the good example of this function of law. His negligence on the road causing her former partner got serious injury yet creates havoc and danger to the people who was on the road. Mr. Silvers behavior consist of criminal offence, and it is not encourages to have such activities. Iii) Creates rights and duties that can be enforced Mr. Silvers as a father and has a responsibility to take care of his child, however thru this case it reflects he did not fulfill a father’s role by not obeying the rules and regulation on the road, and being a reckless driver, therefore he broke the tort law in his scenario by not performing his duty to continuously uphold his responsibility to take care his child. (iv) Provides remedies when right are interfered with or duties are not discharged.
The Administrative law on the road has show the rights and duties that can be enforce, Just like the punishment for Mr. Silvers. He do not obey the law therefore he deserve the two year driving suspension and an $8000 fine as a punishment for do not driving according to the road safety. Questions: Laws are the standard behavior that has been set to people; leading people to behave what they are suppose to be. Knowledge of Law guiding people what is the do and don’t in their life. Knowing Law is everyone responsibility, it is applicable in human daily life; no one will have excuse to ignore the law, including Mr. Silvers.
The people who misconduct the Law may receive the legal punishment from the state. By having the knowledge of Law, Mr. Silvers will able to avoid bringing danger to his family and society yet suffer the punishment from the Judge. Halifax County Court This decision will be treated as persuasive by a Western State Supreme Court. Due to the case was happened in Australia and the court of appeal is in England. According to the binding principle, the court must be in the same hierarchy or decision of the higher court and material facts must be the same.
However the court of appeal at this time is in England, therefore the decision will be treated as persuasive not binding. Question 3: Judge Walker, Sidled LLC and Lord Wolf MR.. Question 4: Joanne Elizabeth Clark was an appellant, she is the person who appeals the case to higher court as she was not satisfied the decision make from the lower court. University of Lancashire and Humidifiers was a respondent, as the University is against the case that taken by the appellant. Question 5: The appellant was required to do the presentation and submit the academic write up for her final exam.
However she lost all the stored data due to hard disk crashed one day before final date for the academic write up submission. Therefore she only able to submit all of her write up notes copied from Methuen commentary. At first, the University’s boards of examiners accused the appellant academic write up for plagiarism. She then told the boards that she had earlier explained the reason to her tutor regarding the weak submission on her academic write up, At the end the roads of examiners accepted appellant’s explanation and decided to re-mark her paper.
However instead of accusing her for plagiarism, she was given O marks from the boards. Appellant was then upset on the board’s decision on her marks and decided pursue this matter to the governors, and the governor do agree that appellant do not deserve her result in O mark and request the boards of examiners should remark her paper. However the boards of examiners fail to do so and the secretary wrote a letter to appellant and saying that her paper no longer treated as a legalism but failure, and one more chance will be given to her to re-sit her examination in order for her to pass her degree.
The condition of the re-sit examination is that she will not able to get a degree classification higher than a third class. As result after re-sitting the final examination, she obtained her degree with third class honor with unsatisfactory due to her future careers path affected. As such, appellant brought this up to High Court. Question 6: The main legal issue is that the governors’ appeal committee and the academic board o not give a proper reply to appellant regard her result marked as O.
Question 7: The appeal make from Ms Clark was successful and the appropriate Judgment should be given. Question 8: In my own opinion, the appellant was not treated fairly by the University as she do not get the reason regarding on her academic write up marked in zero and also the university does not allow those re-sit examination student getting a better result in their exam. Question 9: Total 16 precedents have been used for the case. The decision from courts of other even may change the existing law.