CARDIFF LAW SCHOOL

LEGAL FOUNDATIONS [30]

2014-2015

Module Handbook and Seminar Worksheets

Module Leader: Anna Grear

BRING THIS DOCUMENT WITH YOU TO ALL SEMINARS

If you need this document in an alternative format, such as large print, braille or on coloured paper please contact Alisha Tucker at CollierRobertsLJ@Cardiff.ac.uk, or ask at the Student Support Office.

It is available electronically on the Learning Central pages for Legal Foundations [30].

CONTENTS

1 Contact details for module lecturers and tutors Page 3

2 Learning outcomes Page 3 - 4

3 Syllabus Page 5

4 Structure of the course Pages 5 - 6

5 Textbooks for the module Pages 6 - 8

6 e-Learning materials Page 8

7 Module assessment Pages 8 - 9

8 Note about the Materials Pack Page 9

9 Provisional timetable of lectures and seminars Pages 10 - 12

10 Seminar worksheets Pages 13 - 43

1CONTACT DETAILS FOR MODULE LECTURERS AND TUTORS

Module leader

Anna Grear

Room 2.12

GrearA1@cardiff.ac.uk

Tel: (029) 2087 7467

Tutors and Lecturers

Annette Morris

Wendy Kennett

Manon George

Lloyd Brown

Room 2.06

MorrisA7@Cardiff.ac.uk

Tel: (029) 2087 4580

Room 0.12

KennettWA@cf.ac.uk

(029) 208 75482

Room 3.11

GeorgeME@Cardiff.ac.uk

Tel: (029) 2087 4807

Office: 69 Park Place, Room 2.03

BrownLA2@cardiff.ac.uk

Law Library/Research Workshop Staff

Matthew Davies

Lynn Goodhew

Law Library, 1st floor Arts and Social Studies Library

DaviesM25@Cardiff.ac.uk

Law Library, 1st floor Arts and Social Studies Library

GoodhewLI@Cardiff.ac.uk

IT Workshop

Zafar Khan

Room 0.17

KhanM@Cardiff.ac.uk

Tel: (029) 2087 5718

Times when members of staff are available to see students are posted outside staff offices.

______________________________________________________________________________

2LEARNING OUTCOMES

Legal Foundations (LEFO) is an intensive 30 credit course designed to introduce you to the skills you need to study law successfully. By the time you complete this module, you should achieve the following learning outcomes:

Knowledge and Understanding

Describe the main institutional structures and processes of the legal systems in England and Wales and the EU and explain some of the key differences, rules and values underpinning them.

Be able to state the basic rules governing the relationship between the legal systems of England and Wales, the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Demonstrate an awareness of the relationship between a body of law and its relevant political, social or cultural context with reference to appropriate primary and secondary materials.

Intellectual Skills

Demonstrate a level-appropriate ability to analyse and evaluate argument; demonstrate a level-appropriate ability to interpret texts and to engage critically with materials, both academic and legal.

With some guidance, read and analyse a statute, case, academic article or other relevant material and to identify and engage critically with key statements of law and/or legal argument relevant to a straightforward doctrinal problem or contemporary legal debate.

Demonstrate an ability to apply previously studied legal rules and legal arguments to a doctrinal problem or contemporary debate without support or supervision.

Present, distinguish and make a reasoned choice between alternative solutions to a straightforward doctrinal problem, or to be able to make independent and plausible arguments relevant to a contemporary debate.

Transferable Skills

Effectively demonstrate increasingly autonomous self-management, such as the ability to manage time and to conduct self-directed study in the context of a structured timetable, prescribed learning activities and task deadlines.

Effectively communicate information and ideas, both orally and in writing at a level that demonstrates accurate and clear use of the English language and the ability to present structured, well-reasoned and persuasive argument.

Contribute constructively and reliably to a group task.

Make use of oral and written feedback including feedback obtained through class discussions and other informal feedback mechanisms, to make use of tutor assessment, self-assessment and peer assessment.

Demonstrate basic IT skills and use subject specific electronic sources and virtual learning environments.

Practical Skills

Identify and access up-to-date legislation and case law on a legal issue.

Use appropriate legal research databases to find academic journal articles of relevance to a topic for the purposes of independently supplementing reading lists and taught materials.

Produce written work on a taught topic that is accurately informed by previously studied materials, coherently written, well-structured and appropriately referenced in accordance with OSCOLA guidance.

Make an informed and coherent oral contribution to a tutorial or seminar group discussion on a taught topic.

Locate a variety of primary and secondary materials from a module reading list in both paper and electronic format.

Notices and module information

Important notices and announcements are posted electronically on Learning Central - you must check this regularly, preferably daily. Your tutors may also email you with important information about the module - check your Cardiff University email address daily.

______________________________________________________________________________

3SYLLABUSLegal Method Skills

What is law?

Critical and legal reasoning skills

Anatomy of a case report and thinking like a lawyer

Legal reasoning: precedent

Legal reasoning: interpreting and applying legislation

Mooting exercise

Research and Writing Skills

Use of paper and electronic sources of primary and secondary materials

Evaluating and applying researched materials to an assigned task

Citation and bibliographies

Avoidance of plagiarism

Writing for law

Oral presentation skills

The Legal Systems of England and Wales and the EU

Sources of law

Courts of England and Wales and the EU

Doctrine of precedent

Statutory interpretation and judicial reasoning

The role of the judge

Introduction to the civil justice system

Introduction to the criminal justice system

(Note that the IT Skills training workshop in week 1 underpin aspects of the course.)

________________________________________________________________

4HOW IS THE COURSE STRUCTURED?

The module is delivered through a mixture of lectures and small group seminars. Lectures are 50 minutes in duration; seminars run for 100 minutes. You should expect to spend approximately 10 12 hours preparing for each seminar.

In semester one, the twice-weekly lectures introduce you to aspects of the legal system and to key skills required for thinking like a lawyerthe main and consistent pedagogic focus of the course. In the fortnightly seminars we concentrate in more detail on the practice of legal thinking skills and on legal method, alongside the development of strong, self-directed study habits. A mistake that new law students commonly make is to think that studying law is primarily about absorbing new information. This is a misleading assumption! The study of law is centrally concerned with the development of a particular set of intellectual, analytical and argument-based skillsnot simply the study of legal materials and sources. You will be marked in all your law modules on your ability to make and to present compelling arguments drawing upon law and/or from academic scholarship concerning the law. It is essential, therefore, that you should choose to study independently, work intelligently and practice the skills required for success in law. In short, you are embarking on an intellectual training, and you can only succeed to the level required for high marks if you fully commit to training yourself in the skills covered by this course and fundamental to success in your other law modules.

Lectures

Seminars

2 per week throughout semester 1.

10.00 am on Tuesdays

12.10pm on Wednesdays

Occasional lectures may be given in semester 2.

Lectures are designed to deliver efficiently information concerning the most important aspects of the English legal system, and to expose you to the central skill base required for thinking like a lawyer. Lectures can only introduce you to the bare bones of a topic. You must practice what is taught to you in lectures in order to master the skills required to the appropriate level and read carefully for seminars.

A list of essential and recommended reading is provided for each seminar but don't feel constrained by these read as widely as you are able. In particular, reading a quality daily newspaper is essential if you're to keep abreast of developments in the law.

These are the core of the course, and are where you will do the bulk of your work. Only through preparation for, and active participation in seminars, will you develop the basic skills necessary for you to succeed in law. Skills require constant practice, within and outside seminars. Seminars are also an important means of constant feedback. Every time you engage with peers and tutors, you are gaining feedback useful to the further development of your legal reasoning skills.

Seminars will be highly interactive. You will be expected to undertake individual and group research activities, discuss relevant issues and present, orally and in written form, the fruits of your research conducted both individually and as a member of a team. You will be pressed to develop your skills, whether of interpretation, analysis, argument or presentation. Seminars are critically important for your success.

Advance preparation is essential for Legal Foundations the night before does not allow sufficient time to do the reading and thinking which is necessary for your active seminar participation.

______________________________________________________________________________

5BOOKS

1. Unfortunately, no single book covers all the aspects of the course, however, we recommend that you buy the following as your 'core' book for the legal method elements. The book is accompanied by an excellent online resource centre providing additional support for several aspects of the course.

J Holland and J Webb, Learning Legal Rules, (8th Edn, Oxford University Press, 2013)

2. Another excellent book on legal skills is:

H Carr, S Carter and K Horsey, Skills for Law Students (Oxford University Press, 2009).

We leave the decision as to whether to buy it to you. This book is also accompanied by excellent online resource centre and includes interactive exercises allowing you to test and practice your developing skills. You will find that many of the exercises will help you prepare for seminars.

3. You should buy, and work through, the excellent book on critical reasoning by Anne Thompson: A Thompson, Critical Reasoning: A Practical Introduction (3rd Edn, Routledge, 2009).

4. You should buy or have access to online, a good English dictionary. You will frequently encounter unfamiliar language in your reading, and you need to look words up and learn their meaning. You should also ensure that you have access to a good Law Dictionary for words specific to law or that have a particular legal meaning distinct from every day usage.

5. In semester 2 we focus on research and writing skills. For these elements of the course, we recommend:

E Higgins and L Tatham, Successful Legal Writing (2nd Edn, Sweet and Maxwell, 2011).

Strong research and writing skills can make all the difference between poor or indifferent marks and good ones. This book provides advice and guidance to help you improve your skills and would be a wise investment.

6. You will also need to read widelyand mostly independentlyon the legal system of England and Wales. While there is no set textbook for this element of the course, the following is up-to-date and covers relevant topics at an appropriate level of detail.

G Slapper G and D Kelly, The English Legal System 2014 - 2015 (15th Edn) (Abingdon: Routledge-Cavendish, 2013).

Warning! Law is a fast moving subject. Use textbooks to gain a background understanding of a topic, but be sure to update your knowledge by researching recent developments. We will show you how to do so during the course.

Wider/Contextual Reading:

You should not form the impression that everything you need to know is (or ever can be) contained in one or two books. (Indeed, not everything you need to know is in books at all: the reasoning skills that you will develop (with help, of course) rely on constant practice, and can never be gained by reading alone. It is fundamentally important for you to understand this from the very outset of studying law.) Dont be afraid to use library and on-line legal resources to supplement your knowledgeand keep up to date with current affairs by reading a quality daily newspaper. Practice engaging critically and analytically with everything you hear, see or read in the national media. Question everything. Be consistently active in your thought life. Above all, strive to become autonomous: taking the initiative and responsibility for your own learning is what distinguishes University education from what has gone before. Your contribution to the process of your own learning and developmentand to that of your fellow studentsis what makes University a challenging and a rewarding experience. The more active and autonomous you are, the better! The more you engage with your courses, the better!

______________________________________________________________________________

6E-LEARNING MATERIALS

We offer a range of electronic resources designed to help you improve your legal reasoning, writing, research and presentation skills. You can access these from Learning Central. The Legal Foundations Learning Central pages contain interactive skills-based exercises and links to both internal and external resources. These are filed under Learning Materials/Skills. We hope you find them useful.

Remember, these are here to help you develop the skills you need so USE THEM! Second and third year students frequently tell us that they didnt realise how valuable these resources are until after they had finished the LEFO course. Practice skills from the very outsetand never stop developing them. Be committed enough to your own success to put in the effort and use the resources available to help you.

______________________________________________________________________________

7 HOW IS THE MODULE ASSESSED?

a) Summative Assessment:

Summative assessments are those that contribute to the final assessment of the module. This module is formally assessed through a 2.5 hour exam, comprising multiple choice and short answer questions (50%) AND a 2,500 research essay accompanied by a research trail reflecting upon on your research strategy for the essay (50%). For the essay component, 10% of marks are awarded for the research trail.

Summative essay:

The summative essay and accompanying research trail must be submitted electronically no later than 13.00 on Thursday 30 April 2015.

Full guidance on online submissions is posted on Learning Central. Note that the essay and research trail must be submitted as one document.

Sample essays are available, along with tutors comments. You are strongly advised to look at these before beginning work on your essay.

Select Learning Materials/Skills: Writing for Law from the menu bar and scroll down the page.

You will also find samples of essays and their accompanying Turnitin reports in the folder.

You are strongly advised to make use of all these resources in preparation for both formative and summative assessments in LEFO.

Plagiarism warning!! All essays must be submitted electronically and are run through Turnitin anti-plagiarism software so dont be tempted to use the sample essays as anything other than as a resource for learning writing skills. We will cover how to avoid plagiarism later in the course.

Summative exam:

This is in two sections.

Section 1 comprises 25 multiple choice questions designed to test your knowledge of aspects of reasoning, case analysis, statutory interpretation and aspects of the legal system of England and Wales covered in the lecture course or by your set reading tasks.

Beware: the questions demand a level of knowledge going well beyond A Level. Do not think that superficial understanding of your lecture notes, or residual knowledge from A Level studies, will suffice. Youll be given an opportunity to practice answering sample multiple choice questions typical of those in section 1 of the exam during the course.

Section 2 of the exam tests your practical legal method skills of case analysis and statutory interpretation. You will be given a report of a previously unstudied case and be asked to answer up to ten short questions on it. Youll find exercises to familiarise yourself with the format of section 2 of the exam, comprising questions on a case report, and to help you develop your case analysis skills, on Learning Central:

Select: Learning Materials/Skills/Case analysis from the menu bar.

In addition to the e-learning exercises, you will be given an opportunity to practice your case analysis skills in a piece of formative work to be submitted at the end of semester 1.

b) Formative assessment

Formative assessments are designed to give you feedback on your progress through the course, but do not contribute directly to your final mark for the module. You are required to submit formative work in both semesters.

Semester One: A formative case analysis exercise must be submitted to the Undergraduate Office no later than 13.00 on 12 December 2014.

Semester Two: formative coursework must be submitted in weeks 4/5 of semester 2. In addition, a mock multiple choice exam must be taken electronically in week 14.

__________________________________________________________________________

8MATERIALS PACK

You should have collected a Materials Pack in addition to this handout. If you have not got one, ask for one at the Student Support Office. The pack contains copies of many of the cases and statutory materials you will need for seminars. You MUST bring it with you to all seminars.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

By the end of this session, you should be able to:

Identify the material facts of a case

Identify the legal issue/s in a case report

Identify the decision in a case

Identify the ratio/nes decidendi of a case, explaining why your choice is a ratio

Identify obiter dictum and explain its significance

Understand the techniques of precedent and recognise how they have been applied in the cases studied

Recognise factors influencing the weight or authority of a precedent

Define the following terms: binding precedent; persuasive precedent; distinguish; overrule; reverse; approve; apply

Outline the advantages and disadvantages of the doctrine of precedent.

38

21

9 PROVISIONAL TIMETABLE

N.B. Lectures are held twice a week on Tuesdays at 10.00 am and on Wednesdays at 12.10 EXCEPT WEEKS 9 (Semester 1) and WEEKS 3 and 4 (Semester 2) when lectures are held only on Tuesdays. Seminars run on a fortnightly cycle as indicated below.

Week

Lectures (50 Minutes)

LEFO [30] Seminars (100 minutes)

1 w/c

39/9/14

1. Introduction to Law and the Study of Law (Anna Grear) (Tuesday)

2. Introduction to the English Legal System (Leanne Smith) (Wednesday)

An introduction to the University network and e-learning resources

ALL GROUPS (1 hour only)

2 w/c

6/10/14

3. Finding the Law 1 (covers finding legal materials, finding statute law, finding academic articles) (Matthew Davies/Lynne Goodhew) (Tuesday)

4. Westlaw Presentation (Wednesday)

Seminar 1: Reading and Evaluating Academic Articles

Groups numbered 2

3 w/c 13/10/14

5. Finding the Law 2: Common Law and the Doctrine of Precedent (Wendy Kennett) (Tuesday)

6. Finding the Law 3: Common Law and the Doctrine of Precedent (Wendy Kennett) (Wednesday)

As above

Groups numbered 1

4 w/c

2/10/14

7. Engaging with Law 1: Coping and Self-Management Strategies for the Study of Law (Anna Grear) (Tuesday)

8. Engaging with Law 2: Analysing and Evaluating Reasoning (Anna Grear) (Wednesday)

Seminar 2: Reading and Analysing cases

5 w/c 27/10/14

9. Engaging with Law 3: Law and Reasoning (Anna Grear) (Tuesday)

10. Engaging with Law 4: Understanding Analogy and Distinction (Anna Grear) (Wednesday)

As above

Groups numbered 1

FORMATIVE CASENOTE EXERCISE AVAILABLE ON LEARNING CENTRAL

6 w/c

3/11/14

11. Engaging with Law 5: Interpreting Statutes 1 (Wendy Kennett) (Tuesday)

12. Engaging with Law 6: Interpreting Statutes 2 (Wendy Kennett) (Wednesday)

Seminar 3: Case Study in Precedent

Groups numbered 2

7 w/c 10/11/14

13. Engaging with Law 7: The role of and composition of the judiciary in England and Wales (Annette Morris) (Tuesday)

14. Engaging with Law 8: The role of the courts in England and Wales (Annette Morris) (Wednesday)

As above

Groups numbered 1

8 w/c

17/11/14

15. Engaging with Law 9: An introduction to Civil and Criminal Justice (Annette Morris) (Tuesday)

16. Engaging with Law 10: The Relationship between the EU and the English Legal System (Wendy Kennett) (Wednesday)

Seminar 4: Reading, Interpreting and Applying Statutes

Groups numbered 2

10 w/c

24/11/14

17. Presenting the Law 1: Law essaysthe basics, and an introduction to solving legal hypotheticals (Anna Grear) (Tuesday)

There is no Wednesday lecture this week

As above

Groups numbered 1

10 w/c 1/12/14

READING WEEK

READING WEEK

11 w/c

8/12/14

End of lecture course

SUBMIT FORMATIVE CASENOTES

READING WEEK: WarningUse the Christmas Vacation to prepare. Start work on your essay. Students who dont prepare will struggle.

SEMESTER TWO

Week

Occasional lectures

Seminars

1 w/c 26/1/15

Seminar 5: Legal Research Skills 1: Identifying and Accessing Information and Developing a Research StrategyA Practical Workshop

N.B. Groups numbered 1

TUTORS TO RETURN FORMATIVE CASENOTES

2 w/c 2/2/15

As above

N.B. Groups numbered 2

TUTORS TO RETURN FORMATIVE CASENOTES

3 w/c 9/2/15

19. Feedback lecture on formative casenotes (Tuesday)

Seminar 6: Presenting the Law: Legal Research and Writing Skills: Evaluating and Using Sources to Build an Argument

Groups numbered 1

4 w/c 16/2/15

20. Presenting the Law 2: Mooting Skills Lecture (Bernadette Rainey) (Tuesday)

GROUPS NUMBERED 1 TO SUBMIT FORMATIVE COURSEWORK

As above

Groups numbered 2

5 w/c 23/2/15

GROUPS NUMBERED 2 TO SUBMIT FORMATIVE COURSEWORK

Seminar 7: Presenting the Law: Preparing for a Mooting Exercise

Groups numbered 1

6 w/c 2/3/25

As above

Groups numbered 2

7 w/c 9/3/15

Seminar 8: Presenting the Law: Mooting Exercise: Oral Presentation, Argumentation Skills in the Court Room

Groups numbered 1

8 w/c 16/3/5

As above

Groups numbered 2

9 w/c 23/3/15

TUTORS TO RETURN FORMATIVE COURSEWORK BY END OF WEEK 9

FORMATIVE MOCK MULTIPLE CHOICE EXAM TO BE COMPLETED BY END OF WEEK 14 of SEMESTER 2

SEMINAR WORKSHEETS

An introduction to the University network and e-learning resources

Venue IT training room.

The session is led by Zafar Khan, the Law Schools computing officer.

This is a hands-on introduction to key aspects of the Universitys network, including Learning Central, an electronic learning environment used to support all modules at Cardiff.

No advance preparation is needed for this class. However, you should use this week to start your preparation for seminar 2. The reading is a challenging one. You will need a dictionary and you should try to use the reading techniques and strategies covered in the first lecture. Used well, such strategies help you to work through heavy reading loads more efficientlyboth in terms of saving time and in terms of ensuring that you gain maximum value from the process. The best way to manage an article such as the one you have been set is to ensure that you break it down into its basic themes and topics, and strive to understand the point being made in relation to each one. Studying law, you will often encounter challenging language and argument. You need to get used to reading something several times, being active, breaking it down, making maps and/or clear simple noteswhatever it takes to master it. Dont give up after one reading. Dont just be passive. Get active and push yourself to develop!

SEMINAR 1 Reading and Evaluating Academic Articles

Reading and evaluating the structure, content and argument of a text

Reflections on the nature of legal reasoning

INTRODUCTION

One of greatest challenges facing law students lies in developing effective reading techniques in order to cope with large quantities of frequently complex materials. Reading accurately, and being able to analyse and evaluate what you read, is a key skill for learning to think like a lawyer. The first exercise in this seminar tests your reading skills and helps you to evaluate what you have read, and how well you have read it. The opportunity to begin discussing reading technique with your tutors and peers will be a useful first step in a lifetime of learning about reading as an active and analytical, rather than a passive, process.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

By the end of this session you should:

Begin to develop your skills in reading and evaluating complex academic legal materials, recognising their contribution to the successful study of law

Understand the elements of good legal writing for law students

Understand that law and legal analysis demand active, interpretive engagement.

EXERCISE ONE:Reading and evaluating academic materials

First read:

Holland & Webb, Learning Legal Rules (8th edition), pp. 76 84

You may also find it helpful to read Carr, Carter and Horsey, Skills for Law Students, chapter 4 and to work your way through the accompanying activities on the books website.

Then work through the online tutorial Evaluating information, which you will find at:

https://ilrb.cf.ac.uk/evalinfo/tutorial2/page06.html

Alternatively, you can access this from the Cardiff University website. Select

Current students/Information resources for law/Useful websites/Research and writing skills/Evaluating information tutorial

Finally, read and take notes from:

J Stone, The Ratio of the Ratio Decidendi (1959) 22 Modern Law Review 597-620.

(This is included in your Materials Pack.)

Bring your notes with you as we will discuss them in class. In particular, we will explore how accurate your account of the article by Stone is: Have you captured all the main themes, sub-themes and related points accurately, in an order that reflects the authors organisation of his thought? Have you understood the argument of the relevant article? What is the authors conclusion? How is it supported? (What reasons have been provided in support? What sources/authorities? How logical is the argument?) Please think about these issues as you prepare for the seminar and come ready with a) a map or bullet-list of the articles main organisational themes and b) a brief written nutshell statement of what you understand the argument of the article to be and ALSO c) note down page references of examples you want to use in your discussion of the article. For example, if you want to say that there are 4 core themes, or that the author provides 5 reasons in support of one central point, note down relevant page references so that your tutor and your peers can easily follow your analysis and see where in the text you have drawn it from.

IN CLASS: After a class discussion led by your tutor about the structure and argument of the article:

Q 1: In the light of class discussion of the structure and argument of each article, how accurate was your analysis and understanding of it? Did you miss any key points? If so, why? If not, why not? How did you try to ensure accuracy? What techniques did you use to avoid inaccuracy?

Q 2: With a partner, discuss the reading techniques you applied in reading the article. What methods did you use to ensure that your reading was accurate? What challenges did you encounter? How did you overcome them? Were these challenges intellectual challenges, or psychological challenges, or both? What techniques do you use for effective reading and study?

Q 3: With a partner, discuss what you could do better next time. What new approach or technique might you apply when next confronted with an academic article to analyse?

Youll find further materials to help you develop effective reading techniques on Learning Central. Select Learning Materials/Skills/Reading and Study from the menu bar and open the relevant folder.

EXERCISE TWO

First read:

How to Write a Law Essay and General Feedback for Students On Coursework (both in your Materials Pack).

Q 1: You are given the following essay title:

In every society there is a tension between the desire of citizens to bring to the attention of their fellow citizens matters which they consider to be of importance, and the desire of citizens to be free from disorder. Critically assess the degree to which British public order law and politics protect the democratic importance of the freedom to protest.

a) With a partner, analyse the essay title: i) what task is the essay requiring you to undertake? ii) simply by analysing the essay title, list all the subject matter elements that must be covered if the question is to be precisely and relevantly answered; iii) what does the quotation add, if anything, to your sense of what the question is driving at? iv) would an answer listing information about public order law and introducing the democratic importance of the freedom to protest be an adequate response to the question as posed? If so, why? If not, why not? Be prepared to share you answers with the class and your tutor.

b) Briefly draft a conclusion (a statement that we can pretend, for the purposes of this exercise, that you have argued in support of throughout your essay). Your draft conclusion needs to address the question closely enough, based on what your analysis of the question has just revealed to you. For example, you could begin with, In conclusion, British public order law (and carry on from there to compose a conclusion that addresses the question as posed). (It doesnt matter, for this example, that you havent studied this before. This is about analysing language!)

c) With a partner, write down the topics that you would logically need to research in order to answer the question adequately. Write a list of them together.

Q2: Referring to the materials on coursework feedback, answer the following questions.

a) Given that this generic coursework feedback is based on years of marking the work of literally thousands of law students, what do you deduce about the common habits that pull marks down on law modules?

b) How can you avoid making these common mistakes?

c) What skills do youspecifically need to develop in order to do well in writing legal essays and courseworks? In other words, if you reflect honestly on the coursework feedback, do you notice anything that you tend to do and any areas where you need to improve your own practice? If you think that you do rather well in terms of the advice given for the improvement of marks, what aspects of the advice (ie: the skills and practices that it drives at) can you work on to ensure that you achieve even greater success in the future?

d) In your own words, write a short bullet point list of advice for a new law student faced with writing an essay or coursework. When you have finished your list, swap with a partner. Each partner should mark points where the list is a) unclear in its advice; b) missing something vital; c) where grammar, punctuation and spelling are incorrect; d) useful. Once you have marked up each others advice points, discuss your current understanding of what law essays and coursework will require in order to ensure good marks.

SEMINAR 2 Reading and Analysing cases

INTRODUCTION

This week, we dissect a case report, learning to identify its different component parts and to appreciate what elements of case reports are significant from a legal perspective. Case reports may seem daunting at first but, as with all skills, reading them becomes easier with practice. You will be required to read many cases over the course of your legal studies (and beyond if you enter the legal profession), so it is absolutely vital that you get to grips with how to read them at an early stage of your studiesand continue to practice case analysis skills as you move through your degree studies. We also discuss case analysis methodology and a relevant reading from Glanville Williams.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

By the end of this session you should be able to:

Explain and identify the key elements of a case report

At a basic level, appreciate how the common law develops through judicial decisions

Have a basic grasp of a methodology for the analysis of cases

Understand that case analysis is a question of exercising interpretive skills and legal and linguistic analysis.

EXERCISE 1

Read:

G Williams, excerpt from Learning the Law (12th edition) pp. 95-101 ; Case/Ratio Analysis Methodology. (These are both included in your Materials Pack.)

Q1: On page 96, how does Williams suggest that we find the ratio decidendi?

Q2: What does Williams mean by the term material facts?

Q3: On page 98, Williams summarises the facts and Wright Js conclusion in Wilkinson v Downton. Williams identifies some facts to be irrelevant. What were those factsand why are they irrelevant?

Q4: On pages 98-99, Williams initially frames the ratio decidendi of Wilkinson v Downton as follows:

. . .where the defendant has wilfully told the plaintiff a lie of the character that is likely . . . to frighten and so cause physical harm to the plaintiff, and it has in fact caused such harm, the defendant is liable, in the absence of some ground of justification.

But in the subsequent paragraphs, Williams criticises and modifies parts of this ratio decidendi. Which parts of the ratio decidendi does he modify, and why does he do so? Be sure to justify your answer by making reference to the text of the chapter itselfrefer to a page number/page numbers if necessary to ensure that your answer carries authority.

Q5: On page 100, Williams states that what is really involved in finding the ratio decidendi is a process of abstraction. What does he mean by the term process of abstraction? Justify your answer with reference to the text, citing the text accurately in support of your view.

Q6: On page 100, Williams applies the process of abstraction to two examples, as follows:

CaesarTerrierDogMammalAnimalLiving Thing

Fullerhope Maternity HospitalLondonEnglandEurope

Apply the process of abstraction to the following examples:

PistolAny thing

Yacht (etc)

Cat (etc)

3 bedroom apartment (etc)

Once you have your examples, discuss with a partner any differences (if any) between the examples making up your respective abstraction lists. What do any differences reveal to you about the effect of interpretation and how it influences the abstraction process?

Q7: On page 100, Williams states that the ascertainment of the ratio decidendi of a case depends upon a process of abstraction from the totality of facts that occurred in it. How does the process of abstraction affect the scope of the ratio decidendi?

Q8: On page 101, what factors does Williams identify as relevant when determining when to stop with the process of abstraction?

Q9: What is the final ratio decidendi that Williams arrives at? What does he mean on pages 100-101 when he says that he had carried on the process of abstraction until all the particular facts have been eliminated? What differences are there in the 2 different formulations of the ratio that Williams offers? What conclusions do you draw from the differences?

EXERCISE 2

Read:

Review your notes for lectures 5 and 6 and refresh your memory of Holland and Webb, Learning Legal Rules, pages 76-84.

Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394 (included in your Materials Pack).

Some brief explanatory notes: In Fisher v Bell, the court uses the terms offer and invitation to treat. You may not already have covered this in contract law, so the following brief notes are designed to assist your understanding of the case:

The distinction between an offer and an invitation to treat is pivotal for understanding the moment at which a legally binding contract is capable of being formed. An offer exists where one party extends to another an offer (such as is made by the statement: I offer to sell you a car for three thousand pounds). If the terms of the offer are accepted, then, subject to some additional requirements that we dont need to go into for present purposes, a contract is formed. However, an invitation to treat merely invites another to express an interest in, for example, purchasing something. There are two main forms that an invitation to treat can take:

First, a person might say to you, Ive got a fabulous car. Would you be interested in buying it? There is no offer here that you can acceptthis merely elicits your interestand you would need to agree a specific price before a contract could be formed.

Secondly, there is the kind of situation where a corner shop displays cans of beer on its shelves with a sign next to them stipulating that they cost two pounds fifty pence. You are being invited to offer to buy the beer. When you then approach the counter, you offer to buy the beer by saying something like Ill take this, pleasewhich constitutes your offer to the corner shop. If your offer is accepted (by the accepting of your money, for example) a contract is formed.

With that background information in mind, please answer the following questions, which we will discuss in class. (You will need to bring written answers with you for this exercise. You may need to conduct some basic research to discover some of the answers. For example, you could search through Holland & Webb to discover some of the more general answersor look in a book on the English Legal System. See how much you can find out on your own!)

1 Identify the names of the parties.

2 In what court was the case heard?

3 What is the full citation for this case? In which set of law reports, and when, was this case reported?

4 Is this a criminal or civil case? How can you tell? How does the difference affect the titles given to the parties (usually), and how do you pronounce the v in between the parties names?

5 Who were the judges in this case? What do the abbreviations JJ and CJ mean?

6 What is the function of a headnote? What does the headnote tell you about the coverage and central concerns of the case? And what does it tell you about the holding in the case?

7 What is the name of the Act of Parliament that the Court was interpreting?

8 What was the litigation history of the case? Where is it set out in the case report?

9 Who were JA Cox and P Chadd?

10 At what page does the judgment of the court begin?

11 Lord Parker CJ delivered the judgment of the court. Did the others judges agree with the judgment? What would have happened if the other judges had disagreed with Lord Parker CJ?

12 What were the material facts of the case?

13 What were the specific words in the Act that the Court was asked to interpret?

14 State the legal issue that the Court was asked to decide.

15 What was the Courts conclusion on the legal issue?

16 State what you consider to be the ratio/rationes decidendi of the case.

17 What was the outcome of the case?

18 What is the difference between the outcome or decision of a case and its ratio/rationes?

EXERCISE 3

As carefully as you can, perhaps using coloured marking pens to make the different elements of the text clear to yourself, highlight the following elements of the case report for Fisher v Bell (in your Materials Pack), by putting a coloured line next to (rather than covering) the relevant sections of the text: The headnote; the headnotes account of the facts; the headnotes account of the litigation history of the case; the headnotes account of the holding; the headnotes reference to any precedent cases. Then highlight: The legislative history of the case in the main case report; the account of the case presented by the prosecution; the defence.

Next: List on a piece of paper the distinct points made by Lord Parker CJ as he gives his judgment. Do this in a bullet-point, nutshell style that shows you have grasped the essence of points being made. Try to be as accurate and precise as you can.

You can work with a partner on this element of the seminar task, discussing why you think what you do, what the textual clues are, and refining each others understanding of Lord Parkers judgment and the way (and the degree to which) his conclusion is supported by the reasoning he offers.

SEMINAR 3 Case study in precedent

INTRODUCTION

In this seminar we follow a line of cases to trace how the common law develops through the doctrine of precedent. We focus our attention on analysis of two cases. First, we must identify those aspects of the case reports that are important in legal terms. Second, we will examine exactly how the judges have reasoned to reach their decisions. Finally, you will learn to narrow and broaden the scope of ratio/nes decidendi to gain a deeper understanding of the legal reasoning techniques of advocates and judges in relation to the application and distinguishing of precedent.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

By the end of this session, you should be able to:

Identify the material facts of a case

Identify the legal issue/s in a case report

Identify the decision in a case

Identify the ratio/nes decidendi of a case, explaining why your choice is a ratio

Identify obiter dictum and explain its significance

Understand the techniques of precedent and recognise how they have been applied in the cases studied

Recognise factors influencing the weight or authority of a precedent

Define the following terms: binding precedent; persuasive precedent; distinguish; overrule; reverse; approve; apply

Outline the advantages and disadvantages of the doctrine of precedent.

PREPARATIONReview relevant lecture notes.

Then Read:

Holland & Webb, Learning Legal Rules, chapters 6 and 7. You should also review the ratio analysis methodology (in your Materials Pack).

(You may wish to reinforce your understanding by reading:

Carr, Carter & Horsey, chapters 22 and 23, and by working through the activities on the accompanying websitebut this would be extra to your preparation time.)

It is essential that you read and analyse the two cases listed below, and take the time to mark them up, just as you did last time for Fisher v Bell, bringing your marked up copies to the seminar with you.

Read and Analyse:

Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 1 WLR 1204

British Car Auctions Ltd v Wright [1972] 1 WLR 1519

These two cases are included in your Materials Pack. You will need to read and analyse the cases in

depth. Draw upon the Ratio Methodology Guide, working your way through it systematically. You should also identify all the component elements of the case, drawing on your learning from the last seminar, in your preparation for the session. This should enable you to discern the structural organisation of each judgment (what themes does the judge discuss and in what order?). What is the judges argument? (How does the judge, in other words, handle authority and offer reasons leading towards his or her decision in the case?) BRING THE CASES AND YOUR WORKING NOTES TO CLASS WITH YOU.

EXERCISE ONE: A case study in precedent

Answer the following questions in relation to each of the cases below. You should discuss each question and your answer to it with a partner, drawing upon your pre-seminar preparatory work. You should try to improve constantly upon your analysis by working together. Are you using loose language? Is your characterisation of the facts, issues etc, accurate? Working as partners, interrogate each others responses to be sure that they are carefully developed and precise as possible. How can they be improvedif at all? Is there full enough comprehension of the cases? Have you both been able to see the crucial points upon which the case turns?

Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 1 WLR 1204

British Car Auctions Ltd v Wright [1972] 1 WLR 1519

1What are the material facts of each case?

2What was the legal issue(s) for the court to decide?

3What was the courts decision in each case?

4Did the court consider previous cases? How did it treat them?

5What are the ratio/nes decidendi of the cases?

7What, if any, comments were made obiter dictum? By which judge/s, in which case and where in the case report is this recorded?

8How did each judge structure each judgment (what subjects were discussed, in what order, and what did the judge conclude in relation to each)?

EXERCISE TWO: The development of precedents

With a partner, and starting with Fisher v Bell (see your Materials Packs and notes from the last seminar), and moving through Partridge v Crittenden and British Car Auctions v Wright, trace precisely how, in each subsequent case, the ratio/nes decidendi that you have identified in Fisher v Bell, has been applied by subsequent cases. You can use the following questions to aid you in this exercise:

1 What is the decisive legal similarity between Fisher v Bell and Partridge v Crittenden?

2 What is the ratio/nes decidendi in Fisher v Bell? State it first at its lowest level of abstraction, then apply the abstraction method to yield an interpretation of the ratio/nes decidendi that fits the legally relevant facts of Partridge v Crittenden.

3 What is the ratio/nes decidendi of Partridge v Crittenden?

4 Draft a statement of a ratio decidendi that captures both Fisher v Bell and Partridge v Crittenden. The aim is to capture, in your own words, as precisely as you can, a legal principle for which both cases can fairly and jointly be said to stand.

5 What elements of the ratio/nes decidendi of Partridge v Crittenden draw upon Fisher v Bell? What elements of the ratio/nes decidendi draw upon features of fact or law that cannot reasonably be said to emerge from an abstraction of the ration/nes decidendi of Fisher v Bell? What two propositions of law can Partridge v Crittenden be said to stand for future cases?

6 Now bring the facts of British Car Auctions v Wright within the ratio decidendi that you drafted in response to question 4.

7 Now bring the facts of British Car Auctions v Wright within the ratio/nes decidendi of Fisher v Bell and Partridge v Crittenden by applying the abstraction process to them both. At what level/s in the abstraction process would the ratio/nes of these authorities be said not to apply to the facts of British Car Auctions v Wright?

8 What has this process of analysis taught you about the operation of the doctrine of precedent? What tensions can you discern in the judgments concerning the relationship between the doctrine of precedent and broader social concerns of common sense? What factors can you discern in the judgments that reflect the role of the courts in relation to the democratic role of Parliament as the legislature? What might the strengths and weaknesses of the doctrine of precedent be, based on your analysis of the three cases in question (in the last seminar and in this seminar)?

9

SEMINAR 4 Reading, interpreting and applying statutes

INTRODUCTION

This week we examine statute law. Statutes are frequently difficult and complex documents requiring specialist skills of reading and interpretation. They are also the supreme form of domestic law, taking priority over the common law and equity, so they cannot be ignored!

LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of this session you should be able to:

Critically analyse judicial approaches to statutory interpretation

Apply complex statutory provisions to find the solution to a problem question.

PREPARATION

Review your notes for lectures 9 and 10.

Read:

Holland & Webb, Learning Legal Rules, chapters 9 and 10.

J Adams & R Brownsword, Understanding Law (4th Edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2006), chapter 4.

(A scanned version of this is available on Learning Central. Select Module Information/Reading List/Scanned Reading. Adams & Brownsword is number 2 on the list.

At a minimum, be sure to read pages 101-105.)

Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394.

(You may wish to reinforce your understanding by reading Carr, Carter & Horsey, pp. 262 272, working through activities 4 - 8 on the accompanying website AND chapter 20, working through the activities on the accompanying website.)

Then Read:

S 1 of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 (at the time of Fisher v Bell). The section reads:

1 Penalties for offences in connection with dangerous weapons

(1) Any person who manufactures, sells or hires or offers for sale or hire, or lends or gives to any other person

(a) any knife which has a blade which opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device in or attached to the handle of the knife, sometimes known as a flick knife or flick gun; or

(b) any knife which has a blade which is released from the handle or sheath thereof by the force of gravity or the application of centrifugal force and which, when released, is locked in place by means of a button, spring, lever, or other device, sometimes known as a gravity knife,

shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction in the case of a first offence to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or to both such imprisonment and fine, and in the case of a second or subsequent offence to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding two hundred pounds or to both such imprisonment and fine.

(2) The importation of any such knife as is described in the foregoing subsection is hereby prohibited.

EXERCISE ONE: Theories of adjudication and statutory interpretation

Answer the following questions on your own in writing, and then compare your written answers with a partner. What weaknesses are there in your answers with respect to a) accuracy of comprehension and b) precision of written expressionincluding standards of grammar, spelling and punctuation? How well can your partner, with respect to each answer they have given, explain the logic of their thinking in answering the question? Both partners are to give each other feedback on a) and b) and on the sufficiency of the others thinking in relation to each answer written down.

1 What is the underlying purpose of this statutory provision? What is it aimed at?

2 What is the central issue of statutory interpretation to be decided in Fisher v Bell?

3 Trace Lord Parker CJs reasoning with regard to the interpretation of this statutory provision. What authorities does he cite, and how does he use them?

4 How would the outcome of the case have differed if a) the golden rule had been followed; b) the mischief rule had been followed; c) the purposive approach had been followed?

5 What differences between the golden and mischief rules are there? Would the rules have yielded significantly different outcomes from each other in the case of Fisher v Bell? What about the purposive approach? Would it have yielded an outcome distinct from any of these other rules or approaches to the interpretation of statutes?

6 Imagine that you are a legislative draftsman/woman. Try to amend S 1 as precisely as you can to ensure that future cases following a literal rule of statutory interpretation do not encounter the interpretive problem presented to the Court in Fisher v Bell.

EXERCISE TWO: Applying statutory rules

First Read: S 57 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979. This section reads as follows:

57. Auction sales.

(1) Where goods are put up for sale by auction in lots, each lot is prima facie deemed to be the subject of a separate contract of sale.

(2) A sale by auction is complete when the auctioneer announces its completion by the fall of the hammer, or in other customary manner; and until the announcement is made any bidder may retract his bid.

(3) A sale by auction may be notified to be subject to a reserve or upset price, and a right to bid may also be reserved expressly by or on behalf of the seller.

(4) Where a sale by auction is not notified to be subject to a right to bid by or on behalf of the seller, it is not lawful for the seller to bid himself or to employ any person to bid at the sale, or for the auctioneer knowingly to take any bid from the seller or any such person.

(5) A sale contravening subsection (4) above may be treated as fraudulent by the buyer.

(6) Where, in respect of a sale by auction, a right to bid is expressly reserved (but not otherwise) the seller or any one person on his behalf may bid at the auction.

Questions:

1Delores McDuff loves a good auction. She decides to go to a Charity Gala being held at the Swithuns Hotel to raise money for Childline. During the evening, Delores gets progressively drunk. The auctioneer, Stephen Raffles, is a particularly fast-talking man. His auction style is often likened to a verbal machine gun. At approximately 10.15 pm, he starts to auction a painting: Do I hear 5000? Do I hear 5000? he asks. Delores raises her hand, and just as she does, Raffles says Do I hear 6000? Seeing Deloress raised hand, he immediately hits the table with the hammer and says Sold! To the lady with the pink dress! Dolores is pretty upset by this turn of events, and insists that she should only have to pay 5000. She is eventually carted away yelling at Raffles. In the cold light of day, is Dolores bound to pay 6000 for the painting? Working with a partner, make arguments for both sides of the case by applying the statute to the facts: first for Dolores, then for Raffles. What is the precise legal issue raised by the case? What rules of statutory interpretation are you using in making your arguments a) for Dolores and b) for Raffles?

2 Raffles has a great friend, Charlie Jones. Charlie is a bit of character and loves a good laugh. He asks Raffles if he can hold an event at the Raffles Auction Room in the centre of the city.

Raffles (with some foreboding, to be fair) reluctantly agrees that his old friend can use his place of business to hold an imaginative party event that incorporates an auction at which Charlie himself will be the auctioneer, and at which all the guests will be in theatrical costumes. The auction is to raise money for a charity. During the auction, which Charlie runs from the front of the room with much appreciation from his audience, Charlie responds to a bidder by saying sold and squirting the bidder unexpectedly with a water pistol filled with bright yellow paint. The bidder is so furious about the yellow stain on his costume that he absolutely refuses to pay the funds for the item he was bidding for. Does he have to? Again, working with a partner, make arguments for both sides of the case by applying the statute to the facts: first for Charlie, then for the bidder. What is the precise legal issue raised by the case? What rules of statutory interpretation are you using in making your arguments a) for Charlie and b) for the bidder?

3Raffles discovers that his old friend Charlie, during his action event, has had his wife, Zita, bidding on his behalf. Once this is discovered by some of the partygoers, a bit of a fracas kicks off. Charlie insists that the notice he had pinned to the entrance door should have been adequate warning. The notice reads: My Auction party! My rules! My way! Again, working with a partner, what is the precise legal issue here? Can you make arguments for and against Charlie? How strong/weak are those argumentsand why?

Your tutors will assign teams for next 2 seminar cycles LOOK AHEAD TO SEMINARS 5 and 6 TO CHECK WHAT GENERAL PREPARATORY READING ON RESEARCH SKILLS IS REQUIRED OVER THE CHRISTMAS VACATION. If you are wise, you will start researching and reading for your essay assignment, which you will see below.

In the first seminar, information specialists from the Law Library will lead a workshop in which you will develop a research strategy enabling you to identify and access research materials on a topical legal issue. The seminar will be held in an IT room you will need to check the venue for your group on Learning Central.

In the second, you will work in your teams to discuss and evaluate the fruits of your research, present and oral report, and construct a simple argument. The materials you find will provide the core research for your formative and summative coursework.

Since the workload is relatively intense at the beginning of next semester, you should make a start on the work over your vacations to save yourselves a lot of pressure and stress next semester. In particular, do some research and thinking about the essay topic. Begin to plan your essay with the idea of constructing your own argument in response to the question firmly in mind.

NB: Advance warning:

For Seminar 6 (Semester 2) you must bring with you to the class 2 copies of:

a completed introduction to your essay (see title below)

a 300 word draft of one or more points you will be including in your essay

a completed research trail.

The essay title is:

Critically evaluate the claim that there is normally ONE ratio decidendi, AND ONE ONLY, which explains the holding on the facts, and is as such binding. J Stone, The Ratio of the Ratio Decidendi (1959) 22 Modern Law Review 597-620 at 602-3.

SOME HELPFUL NOTES ON THE ASSESSMENT TASK AHEAD:

(a) Your introduction: should enable the reader to foresee what will lie ahead. A reader (or marker) must be able to see that you have interpreted the question correctly and have identified all relevant issues raised by the question. Importantly, a good introduction will also establish the position you will be adopting, or argument you will be presenting throughout the essay. It should point ahead to the conclusions you will be reaching in response to the question.

(b) The 300-word draft: should present a fully developed argument in relation to one or two points that you will be including in your final draft of the essay. It must be footnoted following the OSCOLA system of referencing. Its purpose is to enable your peer reviewer to give you feedback on the extent to which you have adopted an analytical approach to essay writing, and on your standards of written language.

(c) The research trail: must include full bibliographical details of all sources used. It should provide a reflective account of your research strategy. You should provide a very brief summary of the content of each source, outlining its relevance to your essay and explaining why you consider it to be authoritative. You will find a suggested format for your research trail on Learning Central under Learning Materials/Skills/Research. A paper copy is also included in your Materials Pack.

Referencing: The Law School requires you to use the OSCOLA system of referencing for all your work. Youll find an on-line tutorial, Citing the law, on Learning Central. Select Learning Materials/Skills/Writing for Law/Citing the Law. Alternatively, click on the link below.

https://ilrb.cf.ac.uk/citingreferences/oscola/tutorial/index.html

Failure to use the OSCOLA system will lose you marks.

Plagiarism and unfair practice: you will be expected to be fully aware of the Universitys rules on plagiarism. Here is a link to the relevant pages on the Universitys website:

http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/regis/ifs/plag/index.html

Make full use of the Learning Central resources posted in Learning Materials/Skill/ Writing for Law when preparing your essay. Youll find a useful tutorial on avoiding plagiarism at:

https://ilrb.cf.ac.uk/plagiarism/tutorial/index.html

You must also read Cardiff Law Schools Student Handbook, Part H, Unfair Assessment Practices, Referencing and Plagiarism.

FORMATIVE WORK: After Seminar 6 you will have an opportunity to reflect upon the feedback received and to revise your plans, introductions, drafts and research trails before submitting these as your second piece of formative work for the module.

THIS FORMATIVE WORK MUST BE SUBMITTED NO LATER THAN 1 WEEK AFTER SEMINAR 6. YOUR TUTOR WILL GIVE YOU INSTRUCTIONS ON EXACTLY WHERE AND WHEN TO SUBMIT YOUR WORK

SUMMATIVE WORK: You will receive written feedback from your tutor before the end of week 8 of semester 2. You have a further opportunity to reflect upon this before completing the essay and submitting it as a beautifully crafted piece of summative coursework for the module.

Remember! This is where step 6 comes: Higgins & Tatham, Successful Legal Writing, chapter 9 gives excellent guidance on the process of revising your work in response to feedback.

STEP 6: Editing and Re-drafting your work in the light of self-reflection and/or peer/tutor feedback is the final step on the road to success.

Beware! Students who do not reflect and learn from feedback risk failing to maximise their marks.

SEMESTER TWO

INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH and WRITING

We now begin the next phase of the course in which we aim to equip you with the research, analytical and writing skills which will enable you to earn high marks in all your modules. Think of your essay/problem question/presentation as the final step of a lengthy process during which you will need to draw upon a demanding range of skills. For the remainder of the course, well be taking you through the process by breaking it down into a series of steps. In each of the remaining seminars, we focus on one or more of these steps.

STEP 1: (AU) Analysing and understanding the nature of the task ahead of you is the first step on the road to success. Unless you analyse your essay question, your coursework question, your own dissertation research questionwhatever you are facingyou cannot adequately identify the research field or materials that you will need to read. Remember to read for purpose and to stay focused on relevance.

Beware! Students who set out to answer a question without analysing it can easily present a tell you all I know, information-led, descriptive response instead of an argument. Such a strategy will never attract high marks in law!

STEP 2: (IF) Identifying and finding the materials necessary to complete a task is step 2 on the road to success. Without correctly identifying and finding relevant materials and information information you will not have a solid foundation of knowledge upon which to build. Go beyond your lecture notes and textbooks: use the footnotes in textbooks to guide you to further materials; conduct effective research searches for relevant academic discussions; find any cases that you might need to read in depth in order to do the subject justice. Your choices will depend, of course, on the kind of work you have been set to do: an essay; a problem question; a moot; a dissertation, etc.

Beware! Students who merely regurgitate lecture notes or textbooks and who consequently fail to acquire sufficient breadth and depth of knowledge do not achieve high marks.

STEP 3: (E) Evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the materials found through your research AND the relative weight or authority of the sources themselves is step 3 on the road to success. (Remember to use the evaluation of sources tool supplied with the materials on critical and legal reasoning in your Materials Pack.)

Beware! Students who fail to reflect upon the strengths and weaknesses of their sources or to be selective when deciding what sources to rely upon, do not achieve high marks. Remember that weak sources can undermine the soundness of even well structured and logical arguments!

STEP 4: (UA) Using sources effectively (to build a persuasive argument) in a response aimed precisely at the question as it is posed is step 4 on the road to success. Remember that an argument is a series of reasons leading to a conclusion. Remember that an argument can only be as sound as its reasons and reasoning. Sources operate as reasons (or to support reasons). Your sources need to be reliablebut you also need to use them well!

Beware! Students who merely regurgitate the views expressed in research sources without considering the strengths and weaknesses of what they have readincluding the reliability of the source of the informationdo not achieve high marks. Merely reporting that, for example. author X says A and author Y says B) is mere parroting, not building a persuasive argument.

STEP 5: (CA) Communicating a well-supported and persuasive argument is step 5 on the road to success. A well-supported and persuasive argument needs to be well referenced, and well argued, in the sense that the inferences (all the because and therefore relations of the argument) need to be strong. Good argument also relies on precision of expression. Remember that the communication of a sound, precise argument relies upon sound, precise language. In law, an entire argument can turn on the choice of a single word, and the outcome of a legal case can hang upon the addition or removal of a comma. You need to try as hard as you can to develop the habit of being as precise and careful as you are able to in the communication of your own arguments.

Beware! Students who do not present a series of well-sourced and reliable reasons leading to a well supported conclusion do not get high marksnot least because students who fail to to offer a series of reasons leading to a conclusion FAIL TO MAKE AN ARGUMENT AT ALL. Students who offer a series of poorly sourced or unreliable reasons cannot offer a sound argument. Students who fail to offer good reasoning cannot offer a sound argument. Additionally, students who make frequent errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation or syntax, or who adopt an inappropriate style of writing, do not achieve high marks.

Finally Students who fail to provide proper acknowledgment of their sources do not achieve high marks AND RISK BEING PENALISED FOR PLAGIARISM!

STEP 6: (ER) Editing and Re-drafting your work in the light of self-reflection and/or peer/tutor feedback is the final step on the road to success. (Good writing is 40% research, 20% writing and 40% editing. This means editing for strength of reasoning, whether there is adequate referencing, and editing for the issues of grammar, punctuation and syntax that can so easily undermine clarity and cogency!) Remember to leave enough time for you to edit each time with fresh eyes. (You need to plan time gaps into your workload planning, so that you can actually see your own errors. Aim to edit your work at least 4 or 5 times before you hand it in). (An important aside related to editing and re-drafting: It is very important to learn to value feedback and to be unthreatened by critical engagement with your workincluding your own critical engagement with it. You get a lot of feedback on this course: from your peers in seminar exercises, from your tutors in seminars and finally, in writing on your formative assessments. Try to develop the habit of valuing and learning from all feedback on offerand of becoming reflective and confidently self-aware in relation to the standard of your own work.) Strive for excellence!

Beware! Students who do not reflect and learn from feedback on their written work (whether in class or in response to assessments) may fail to maximise their marks. Students who only edit once or twice severely limit the quality of their own work!

Mnemonic: AU IF E and U had A CARE (Oh, if he and you had a care).

Seminars 5 and 6 take you through the stages of successful legal writing leading to the end product: your summative essay!

SEMINAR 5: Legal Research and Writing Skills: Identifying and accessing information and developing a research strategy a practical workshop

INTRODUCTION AND A REMINDER

We now begin the next phase of the course in which we aim to further develop the research, analytical and writing skills which will enable you to earn high marks in all your modules. Think of your essay/problem question/presentation as the final step of a lengthy process during which you will need to draw upon a demanding range of skills. For the remainder of the course, we will be taking you through the process by breaking it down into a series of steps. In each of the remaining seminars, we focus on one or more of these steps. These skills, as we have been emphasising to you throughout this course, are critical to your success in any law module that you takeand to your future success as a lawyer (or to any role that draws upon your training here). Work well, be attentive, and above allpractice, practice, practice!

This session takes place in an IT room and is conducted by information specialists from the law library. Building on the Westlaw lecture in week 2 and on subsequent lectures, you will be using the session to identify information relevant to an assigned research topic through Westlaw UK and other electronic database and web-based sources. The aim of this session is to help you develop a research strategy that can be applied to research tasks for this course and for all other law modules. You will be given hands-on assistance in identifying information needed to complete the tasks in the next two cycles of seminars.

The research skills you acquire this week are crucial without them you will not be able to complete these tasks successfully and you will struggle in your other modules. This week you will use electronic sources of legal information to identify legal materials. Many materials will be available only in hard copy in the Law Library and you will need to follow up your initial electronic searches by accessing these in the library.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of the session you should be able to:

Use a variety of electronic sources to identify material relevant to a research task

Access identified sources electronically where possible

Identify and find sources held in hard copy in the Law Library

DO NOT RELY ON GOOGLE OR WEBSITES SUCH AS WIKIPEDIA INFORMATION RETRIEVED THROUGH SOURCES SUCH AS THESE MAY BE INACCURATE AND WILL LACK AUTHORITY.

GENERAL PREPARATION ON RESEARCH SKILLS

We strongly advise you to read the following:

E Higgins & L Tatham, Successful Legal Writing, 2nd Edition, chapters 1 -3 AND pp. 55-84.

Materials on Critical and Legal Reasoning (supplied in your Materials Pack).

You could also read, if you have time: Carr, Carter & Horsey, pages 138-139; 154-165; 192-203; 210-222 and 226-240, working through the activities on the accompanying website.

Holland & Webb, Learning Legal Rules, chapter 2.

This is a heavy load, so we advise you to complete this preparatory reading over the Christmas vacationas well as starting some early research and reading around the essay title. This seminar provides valuable guidance on research and writing skills that will stand you in good stead for the remainder of your studies.

SPECIFIC PREPARATION

Look ahead to seminar 6. Read the activities you will be expected to undertake. In seminar 6as you were warned at the end of last semesteryou will work in teams to reflect upon and review the research process and to deliver a) a short oral team report based upon that researchand b) a team argument on the theme of the essay. You should base your research and preparation on the following essay titlewhich, as previously noted, is the title of your summative essay:

Critically evaluate the claim that there is normally ONE ratio decidendi, AND ONE ONLY, which explains the holding on the facts, and is as such binding. J Stone, The Ratio of the Ratio Decidendi (1959) 22 Modern Law Review 597-620 at 602-3.

NB: You should also start preparing your essay introduction, a 300-word draft of one or more points in the essay and a research trail if you have not already done sowhich you should have done over the Christmas break. This will be peer-evaluated in Seminar 6, so you will need to bring it with you. This work, once you have edited it in the light of feedback received in class, will be submitted as your formative assessment work for semester 2. (You will also be given feedback from your tutor on your formative work before you submit the completed essay as summative coursework.)

You will be expected to have done your own initial research before this weeks session. Without a basic understanding of the subject, and some of the challenges of research itself, the specialised research you will be doing in this session will be much less meaningful and useful for you.

It is often helpful to use the index of a textbook (in this case such as the index in Slapper & Kelly, The English Legal System (or another up to date textbook)) to familiarise yourselves with the bare bones of an assigned topic and the issues that arise in relation to it. It is also important to find good academic articles on a topic. For example, in relation to this particular essay assignment, it would be sensible to revisit the article by Julius Stone from Seminar 1 (in your Materials Pack) and build your research upon any clues you can find about the subject.

For the future, remember that textbooks, in particular, can never be completely up-to-date, nor are they likely to focus on assignment topics in sufficient detail for an essay. They are, however, a valuable first port of call when you are trying to gain an understanding of a subject areaand footnotes, in particular, can be very useful for pointing you to further sources of research.

EXERCISE

Working in your teams, identify the materials needed to complete your essay taskand add them to any you have been able to discover on your own over the Christmas vacation period. Note that not all materials you identify as being relevant will necessarily be available electronically you may need to visit the library and find paper copies of some them.

Make sure that you keep a careful record of your research, using the Research Trail pro-forma on LEFOs Learning Central pages. (Youll find this in Learning Materials/Skills/Research. A paper copy is also included in your Materials Pack.)

Always record FULL BIBLIOGRAPHICAL DETAILS of all items researched, using the OSCOLA method of referencing. An on-line tutorial introducing you to OSCOLA is available from the Law School home pages and on LEFOs Learning Central pages (Select Learning Materials/Skills/ Research and scroll down to Citing the law.)

During this week, continue to prepare and finesse your essay plan, 300 word draft, introduction and research trail.

As already noted twice in this Handbook, for Seminar 6 you must bring with you to the class 2 copies of:

a completed introduction to your essay (see title below)

a 300 word draft of one or more points you will be including in your essay

a completed research trail.

The essay titleto remind you againis:

Critically evaluate the claim that there is normally ONE ratio decidendi, AND ONE ONLY, which explains the holding on the facts, and is as such binding. J Stone, The Ratio of the Ratio Decidendi (1959) 22 Modern Law Review 597-620 at 602-3.

SEMINAR 6

Legal Research and Writing Skills: Evaluating and using sources to build an argument

(N.B. TUTORS TO ASSIGN TEAMS FOR THE MOOTING EXERCISE)

INTRODUCTION AND REMINDER

The purpose of this seminar is to help you progress from step 1 (analysing and understanding the nature of the task ahead of you (in this case: the essay question, which you should have been thinking carefully about for a while now) and step 2 (identifying and finding materials, which you have practised alone and then with some training) to step 3 (evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of sources), to step 4 (using sources to construct a persuasive argument) and on to step 5 (communicating a persuasive argumentin this case, orally).

Once you have collected all reasonably available and relevant information, you must reflect upon it carefully. First, you must re-assess its relevance to your task. Once you have filtered out any irrelevant content, you should make a judgement about the quality of your remaining sources. This will involve questions such as: Are the sources reliable? What factors might influence their reliability? Might the author be biased? Where has the author drawn his/her information from? Is the author merely repeating information that s/he has taken from another source? Is the original source reliable? How might you check? Has the material been published? Where? Why might this matter? What weight of authority does each source carry? What factors might influence this?

You will see that evaluating your sources can be a demanding process. In your teams, you will consider the sources you have researched in the light of the questions posed above.

This seminar will also give you the chance to appreciate what you need to do to develop your written communication skills, focusing on essay writingwith a special emphasis (as is only proper for law training) on the construction of persuasive, well-written, well-supported argument.

You should note that the Higher Education benchmarks for graduates place great emphasis on excellent written and oral communication skills. In addition, the discipline of law imposes its own demands on how information should be presented and referenced. During your studies you will be asked to communicate your ideas in many different ways, ranging from traditional essays, answering problem questions, writing reports, oral advocacy and so on (see the mooting exercise in the final seminar). Working on your writing skills now will earn you extra marks in your future studies. Many modules are assessed partly or wholly by written work as opposed to a traditional closed book exam.

In this seminar, you will be able to conduct the valuable task of reviewing another students essay plan, 300 word draft, introduction and research trail, as well as constructing a team report on research process and presenting a short oral team argument addressing the essay title.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

By the end of the session you should be able to:

Assess the relevance of researched material to a given task

Recognise differences in authority between materials accessed from a variety of sources

Recognise bias in researched material

Filter out irrelevant information and information drawn from unreliable sources

Prioritise relevant information drawn from authoritative sources.

Understand how to construct and present an authoritative argument from an assigned position.

Be able to explain what the University defines as plagiarism and demonstrate techniques for avoiding it

Understand the need to use the OSCOLA system of referencing and citation

Recognise the qualities of a good piece of essay writing, explaining what makes it good

Recognise the flaws in a piece of writing, explaining why the flaws detract from the merits of the piece

Give critical feedback to others on the merits and demerits of their piece of writing, and on the construction and presentation of their argument.

GENERAL PREPARATION

We recommend that you should definitely read:

How to Write a Law Essay and General Feedback for Students On Coursework, as well as the Cardiff Law School Marking?Assessment Criteria (all in your Materials Pack).

Carr, Carter & Horsey, chapters 3 and 25, and the activities on the accompanying website. You should also work through the activities on avoiding plagiarism see Part 1: Study skills at 7.

In addition, make full use of the resources on Learning Central/Learning Materials/Skills/Writing for Law. These include examples of essays written by students in previous years together with markers comments. We also recommend that you work through the following online tutorial to help you evaluate your researched sources: https://ilrb.cf.ac.uk/evalinfo/tutorial2/index.html. Youll find this on Learning Central under Learning Materials/Skills/Writing for Law.

You should also read, if you have time:

E Higgins & L Tatham, Successful Legal Writing, 2nd Edition (Sweet & Maxwell, 2011), pp. 84-99, and chapters 6, 7 and 8.

Holland & Webb, Learning Legal Rules, chapter 4.

Slapper & Kelly: the companion website accompanying The English Legal System includes a section on writing skills (select Legal Skills Guide from the menu bar across the top of the screen).

Dont worry if you cant read all these! We include them for you to return to whenever you might need guidance on writing for law.

SPECIFIC PREPARATION

Read all the materials accessed during and after the research workshop. Whilst doing so, make a note for each recording your views on its relevance and weight of authority in relation to the essay title. Remember, you must bring with you to this class 2 copies of:

a completed introduction to your essay (see title below)

a 300 word draft of one or more points you will be including in your essay

a completed research trail.

The essay titleto remind you again and for the sake of your convenience is:

Critically evaluate the claim that there is normally ONE ratio decidendi, AND ONE ONLY, which explains the holding on the facts, and is as such binding. J Stone, The Ratio of the Ratio Decidendi (1959) 22 Modern Law Review 597-620 at 602-3.

We will peer review these in class. (*If you would prefer your work to remain anonymous, put your student number on each sheet, but omit your name.)

EXERCISE 1: Evaluating your materials

In your teams, consider at least two sources you have researched in the light of these questions:

How relevant is the information contained within it to your debate teams assigned position and to the essay title?

Is it reliable? What factors might influence its reliability?

Where has the author drawn his/her information from?

Should I take what the author says at face value or might s/he be biased?

Is the author merely repeating information that s/he has taken from another source?

Is that source reliable? How might you check?

Has the material been published? Where? Why might this matter?

What weight of authority does each source carry? What factors might influence this?

EXERCISE 2: Peer-feedback exercise

In your team, put one copy of all the prepared work in the centre of the table. Switch tables with a neighbouring team. Each team member should now carefully peer review another persons work, using the Cardiff Law School marking and assessment criteria to evaluate the work under each heading on the assessment criteria. You should write a comment for each assessment head, explaining to the person whose work it is how they have done and where they have fallen short or done well. Be as fair and honest as you can. Learning to mark work against criteria is a particularly valuable way of understanding the strengths and weaknesses of your own work too.

EXERCISE 3: Using sources to build an argument

Each team will now present a) an oral report on their own research process (drawn from all the members of the team to produce one, brief, collated account) and b) an argument addressing the essay question.

Each teams report needs to be very brief, no longer than 3 minutes, covering the main sources found and analysed. The argument addressing the essay title needs to present a well-supported conclusion, with clear reasons and reasoning. First, the team must jointly construct the argument, collaborating to produce a clear structurebut one team member should be chosen to present it orally. The oral presentation of the argument should take no more than 7 minutes.

While each team presents their brief report and argument, other teams will take notes to present feedback to the presenting team. This feedback should be written down on paper and should aim to evaluate the argument for: the clarity of its introduction; the clarity of its structure; the clarity of its conclusion; the degree to which the conclusion is rationally supported by good reasoning and for the overall flow and cogency of the presentation of the argumentincluding the degree to which the team argument, overall, fits together seamlessly into one persuasive argument, rather than being broken or badly structured.

Five minutes before the end of the class, you can collect your feedback from the team that marked your work. As you refine your work before handing it in, take note (again) of the following advice:

(a) Your introduction: should enable the reader to foresee what will lie ahead. A reader (or marker) must be able to see that you have interpreted the question correctly and have identified all relevant issues raised by the question. Importantly, a good introduction will also establish the position you will be adopting, or argument you will be presenting throughout the essay. It should point ahead to the conclusions you will be reaching in response to the question.

(b) The 300-word draft: should present a fully developed argument in relation to one or points that you will be including in your final draft of the essay. It must be footnoted following the OSCOLA system of referencing. Its purpose is to enable your peer reviewer to give you feedback on the extent to which you have adopted an analytical approach to essay writing, and on your standards of written language.

(c) The research trail: must include full bibliographical details of all sources used. It should provide a reflective account of your research strategy. You should provide a very brief summary of the content of each source, outlining its relevance to your essay and explaining why you consider it to be authoritative. You will find a suggested format for your research trail on Learning Central under Learning Materials/Skills/Research. A paper copy is also included in your Materials Pack.

Referencing: The Law School requires you to use the OSCOLA system of referencing fo