The University of the South Pacific          
Examinations
Semester 2 - 2000
Emalus Campus
 

 

 

SCHOOL OF LAW

 

 

COURSE NAME:                                   LEGAL SYSTEMS II

 

 

COURSE NO:                                        LA101

 

 

TIME ALLOWED:                                  THREE (3) HOURS

 

 

READING TIME:                                    TEN (10) MINUTES

 

 

NUMBER OF PAGES:                            FIVE (5), INCLUDING COVER PAGE

 

 

NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ON PAPER:              SEVEN (7)

 

 

NUMBER OF QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED: FIVE (5)       

 

 

MARK ALLOCATED FOR EACH QUESTION:     

 

The questions in section A carry fifteen (15) marks and those in section B carry ten (10) marks each.

 

 

 

TOTAL MARKS: SIXTY (60)                        

 

 

 

MATERIALS PERMITTED IN EXAMINATION ROOM:

Unannotated or unmarked copies of LA 101 Readers.

 

 

 

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:

You are required to do five (5) questions altogether: the two compulsory questions in section A and any three questions in section B. Do not forget to cite legal authorities for your answers.

 

 

SECTION A

 

The two (2) questions in this section are compulsory. Each carries fifteen (15) marks so the total number of marks for this section is thirty (30). Your answers to these two questions should be between six to twelve paragraphs long.

 

******************************************************************************

 

 

QUESTION ONE

 

You are a lawyer in private practice and Bob, a client, has just finished giving you instructions about a particular legal problem.

 

Bob is the headmaster of the local high school and is also the rugby coach of the school. He informed you that yesterday the Magistrates Court convicted him on a charge of common assault and sentenced him to imprisonment for two years but suspended the sentence and placed him on a two-year good behaviour bond. This arose from an incident where he punched the referee during a game of rugby last weekend. The Penal Code defines assault as follows:

 

Assaults

244. Any person who unlawfully assaults another is guilty of an offence and shall be liable to imprisonment for one year.

 

Bob tells you that the magistrate who heard the case is a cousin of the referee whom Bob punched. During the trial, several of the prosecution witnesses gave evidence in the local language, which Bob does not know well and this was made worse by the court-provided interpreter who spoke English very poorly.  As a result Bob feels that he was not able to clearly understand the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and that the interpreter may have failed to properly convey Bob’s questions in cross-examination to the prosecution witnesses. Bob gave evidence on his own behalf and when he tried to call his witnesses the magistrate intervened saying that this was not necessary because he felt that the witnesses would not have anything useful to add to what Bob already said.

 

Bob is afraid that the conviction will prejudice his teaching career. So he asks you to bring an appeal against his conviction by the magistrate’s court. Identify and explain all possible grounds of appeal which are relevant to the matter.

(15 marks)

 

 

(Note: You can answer this from the point of view of the laws of any USP country).

QUESTION TWO

 

You are a judge of the high court.

 

The parties have concluded their final submissions in your court and you have adjourned to consider your decision. The trial is for a charge of indecent assault contrary to the Penal Code, section 141 which defines indecent assault as follows:

 

Indecent assaults

141. -(1) Any person who unlawfully and indecently assaults any woman or girl is guilty of a felony, and shall be liable to imprisonment for five years.

 

        (2) It is no defence to a charge for an indecent assault on a girl under the age of fifteen years to prove that she consented to the act of indecency.

 

The only witness for the prosecution was the complainant herself. According to her birth certificate, which was tendered in court, she was born on 1 December 1985. She testified that on the afternoon of 1st of July this year she was alone and on her way home from school when she met the accused whom she knows well. He stopped her for a chat and whilst the two of them were seated he tried to fondle her between the thighs and to kiss her against her will. She said that she refused his advances and in the ensuing struggle she sustained some bruises to her thighs and her skirt was torn: otherwise, she escaped intact. She then ran off and reported the matter to the police. The prosecution did not call any other witnesses but the girl’s birth certificate and torn skirt were tendered in evidence. You find the complainant to be truthful and her evidence to be compelling. The accused denied the charges and declined to give evidence. However, he submitted that last month the magistrate’s court had acquitted him of assault arising from the same incident and so he should not be tried again. 

 

You are now considering your decision.

 

(a)       What matters of fact do you expect the prosecution to prove by its evidence in order to sustain the preferred charge?

 

(b)      Is the evidence presented sufficient for you to convict the accused?

 

(c)       What is your answer to the accused person’s plea of autrefois acquit?

 

(15 marks)

 

(Again, you can answer this from the point of view of the laws of any USP country of your choice).

 

 

 

 

SECTION B

 

This section contains five questions. You are required to answer only three (3) questions from the section. Each question carries ten (10) marks so the total number of marks for this section is thirty (30). Your answers to these questions should be between four to nine paragraphs long.

 

*********************************************************************

 

QUESTION THREE

 

Explain and critique the implications of the three (3) following cases on the applicability of rules of natural justice to quasi-judicial bodies and tribunals other than courts of law:

 

(a)   Garba v. University of Maiduguri (Reader One, page 193);

 

(b)  In re Tuilupua (Reader One, page 233); and

 

(c)   Matatumua Maimoaga v. Attorney General (Reader One, page 298a). 

 

 (10 marks)

 

QUESTION FOUR

 

The common law rule for interpretation of written Constitutions is that the document should be read having regard to its “context”.

 

Identify and explain each of the different connotations or meanings of the word “context” as used in this regard and cite a case or two to illustrate each.

 

(10 marks)

 

 

QUESTION FIVE

 

In countries which follow the common law system, the courts refer to various factors in their quest to develop the body of rules of common law and equity. An important factor which they use is principles of logic.

Identify and explain five (5) commonly recognised principles of logic and cite a case to show each reasoning process as used by the courts in their decision-making.

 (10 marks)

QUESTION SIX

 

The courts at common law have long recognised that in interpreting statutes, they should always look at the “textual and factual context of the words of the statute”.

With reference to decided cases, explain what the phrase “textual and factual context of the words of the statute” means.

(10 marks)

 

 

QUESTION SEVEN

 

Statutes and principles of common law and equity frequently empower the courts to exercise their discretion in deciding various kinds of matters. However, this is to be done in compliance with the requirements of three general criteria.

Identify and explain each of these criteria and cite a case or two to illustrate each.

 (10 marks)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

End of Examination Paper