property law essay (2 Viewers)

[scarecrow_of_oz]

well done!
although i would try and integrate ward into it somewhere since the question does mention it - it's just relevant because it's after mabo, and googling it i found that it's sort of when native title will be found to be extinguished under the native title act - so i'm sort of using it to underline my last point, which is pretty much that although there is room for compromise/a level of compatibility it will always be limited...
gah i'm always the last out of us to finish... only 1700 more words to go...

 

[iwannarock]

good luck with it.

yeah i might try and and fit a line or two about ward in. it is in the question so i don't wanna be marked down for it. thanks for the tip.

fitting it all in the 6 page limit was the hardest thing for me especially with references.

im hoping for the P that just scrapes in.

im gonna go take a gander at these constitution questions.

 

[iwannarock]

i just saw the constitution questions for the first time.


......

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

don't worry about it we've got two weeks we can work on it together i've got some notes i can send u

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

900 words down, a couple of hours and 1100 words to go. oh dear.

 

[MaryJane]

Chin up honey! You'll get through it!

And then its on to constitutional law. Reading those questions, I really wish I didnt have Ale as a tutor

 

[iwannarock]

And then its on to constitutional law. Reading those questions, I really wish I didnt have Ale as a tutor

I also have Ale.

Its funny because in my tute (tuesday one) he's always going on about how lucky we are being second. he says he screws things up in the earlier tute (must be monday) and that in our tute he explains it properly because he's had more time to figure out the best way to explain things.

either way i haven't touched the readings.

nobody i know has been doing the readings.

 

[MaryJane]

Hmmm... and then I have him on Friday, which must make it the most optimal tute seeing he can refine his definitions yet again...

Either way, it still doesnt make sense.

I seriously dont know which const one to pick. I thought I'd do the separation of powers, but I dont know... I only thought of that one because I know the concept! And we have to use two additional sources and it cant be a case or anything even referred to for one second in the text. It sucks. I have no idea where the hell I'm going to find const sources like that. Sigh.

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

i'm torn between doing the one on fedalism (i find the concept interesting) and the one on separation of powers (mite find a way to integrate some of the theorists into it - always fun and word consuming. i'm going to wait until i've gotten thru more of the readings before i decide. i'm going to the state library with hash on monday either of u want to come?

 

[MaryJane]

I agree that federalism is interesting, but I dont want to touch it! I'm doing the separation of powers one... I'm 1400 words through.. I havent made any reference to anything she said in the lecture (because I dont listen to them), so hopefully I'm not missing any vital info! I just skimmed through the relevant readings and the tute and pieced it together from there.

Oh, I cant wait until this is finished!! I want it done by Tuesday, so I can start on my psych report

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

wow go u! i'm not even planning to start writing until thursday
i'm also doing separation of powers i've decided. how are u approaching it? i haven't completely decided yet, but was thinking maybe talk about the doctrine and its basis, then go on about the interrelationship between the 'separate' powers... then maybe say how there are other checks on power/divides built into the law anyway so while certain checks upon/seperations of power are apparent within the law, they're not so clearly defined as the traditional doctrine states

 

[MaryJane]

I basically talked about the distinction between judicial/non-judicial power and how its ambiguous.. Used the Boilermakers case and Joske... Sorta like your idea. Just a whole lotta historical stuff, and trying to tie it all together as to how it is/isnt a legal fiction.

I only used the actual quote from Joske twice in the whole thing... Hope they dont mind!

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

as long as u answered the question i'm sure that's fine- u wouldn't want it to get repetitive. have u finished yet?

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

kk i've switched to constitutional interpretation now...
will start writing tommorrow

 

[iwannarock]

ok, im gonna start doing the reading soon.

i've decided on doing the seperation of power one.

the question seems simpler, its shorter, and i actually am sorta familiar with the seperation of powers doctrine already too.

the other ones just seem like too much trouble.

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

yeah it's not a bad question i think quite a few people are doing that one
interpretation's not bad, just trying to work out how the theories relate to each other
i've done about 300 words so far - not bad for me lol that's exactly what i had done on the morning property was due

 

[iwannarock]

i havent started writing yet.

this is gonna be a looooong night.

im still getting my head around things.

i think i'll be finishing last this time.

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

poor iwr
lol i feel ur pain usually it's me
and i'm sure u'll still finish before me i don't plan to be finished by tonight just aiming to get up to the 1000 words mark.
do u want me to send u notes? what's ur email addy?

 

[iwannarock]

mojojojo6969@hotmail.com

but you're doing the other question so i dont see how the notes may help me ???

i'd probably get busted by the plagiarism police just for looking at them:rofl:

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

yeah but i was doing sep. of powers initially so i've got some notes on it will send them on