190 likes | 331 Views
A2 Law Chief Examiner Professor Iwan Davies Principal Examiner Dr Pauline O’Hara. General Observations. Some candidates did not answer the required number of questions - still rubric errors. Weaker candidates presented pre-prepared generic answers. General Observations.
E N D
A2 LawChief ExaminerProfessor Iwan Davies Principal ExaminerDr Pauline O’Hara
General Observations • Some candidates did not answer the required number of questions - still rubric errors. • Weaker candidates presented pre-prepared generic answers.
General Observations • Standard of previous years was maintained. • Many candidates produced excellent scripts. • Some candidates displayed up to date knowledge of recent changes in the law.
Option 01 – Contract and Consumer Law LA3 • LA3 was generally well answered with some good responses. • Weaknesses in some answers included a lack of understanding of the importance of the Law Commission in promoting law reform.
Option 01 – Contract and Consumer Law LA4 • LA4 was also generally well answered with some good responses. • Weaknesses in some answers included a lack of knowledge of the roles of the new consumer councils and Ombudsman Schemes.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA3 & LA4 • Overall candidates performed better at LA4 than LA3. • Candidates seem to be well-prepared for the essay questions but appear to be less prepared for the scenario questions in LA3. • Too many candidates fail to write the question number order on the front of their answer booklet.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA3 Question One • Many candidates produce logical and well-structured answers. However, some candidates included too much irrelevant material. • Part(b) was well-answered however, there are still some candidates who are not aware of the reforms in the CJA 2003.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA3 Question Two • The overall standard for this question was good. • Some candidates left out the defences altogether or dealt with them superficially. • In part (b) some answers revealed little or no understanding of criminal defence arrangements.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA3 Question Three • Candidates found this a challenging question and they approached it as a general PACE answer rather than the admissibility of confessional evidence. • In (b) too many candidates provided weak answers omitting the six key qualities, the role of the LAC and the Courts Act 2003.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA3 Question Four • This was overall well done. However, some candidates managed to turn the question towards a more general consideration of Harry’s criminal liability. • Part (b) produced some excellent answers.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA4 Question 1 • This produced the best answers on the paper with good reference to case-law and reports.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA4 Question 2 • This was a less popular question. • There were many well-rehearsed answers.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA4 Question 3 • A popular question with candidates able to provide strong evaluation.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA4 Question 4 • Answers were often very detailed highlighting the defects of the current law and addressing the issue of reform.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA4 Question 5 • A very popular question. • Many candidates earned full marks for both (a) and (b). • In part (b) a small number of candidates confused statutory interpretation with judicial precedent.
Option 02 – Criminal Law & Justice LA4 Question 6 • In part (a) candidates tended to concentrate on the aims of sentencing rather than the guidelines. • Some candidates failed to answer (b) or provided weak answers.
Option 03 – Freedom of the Individual and Protection of Human Rights LA3 & LA4 • Overall candidates performed better at LA4 than LA3. • The overall performance was strong with many candidates demonstrating excellent knowledge and understanding of the law relating to human rights.
Specific Weaknesses • Time allocation; still evidence of over and underwriting. • Not defining key terms. • Limited deployment of paragraphs. • Repetition. • Dated cases / lacking in legal authority.
For further information, please contact the Subject Officer at the WJEC: Joanna Lewis 245 Western Avenue Cardiff CF5 2YX joanna.lewis@wjec.co.uk