WJEC Eduqas A level Law Component 1 Review

WJEC Eduqas A level Law Component 1 - Review of 2019

REVIEW OF COMPONENT 1 • Minimal rubric infringements. • There were some who attempted more that the required questions affecting their timing. • Handwriting an issue in some cases. Section A: Candidates need to be prepared for the specific nature of the compulsory questions. Question 1 • Generally well answered with clear explanation of both rules. • Case used for each and was needed to access full marks. Question 2: • The weaker of the two compulsory questions. • Some omitted question entirely. • Candidates struggled with the precise nature of the question and included other elements of the UK Constitution. • Only stronger responses included reference to Dicey and other relevant authority. 2

REVIEW OF COMPONENT 1 Section A: For the second half of Section A, there is a choice between Questions 3 & 4 Question 3 • The least popular question of the two on topic of judicial precedent. • Inclusion of case law and examples were required for the full 15 marks. • Even in the application questions, some explanation of the related legal issues is necessary and expected in order to frame the application. • Correct application requires consideration of ALL the options available to the judge. • General lack of legal authority and responses varied in terms of quality. • A significant minority misunderstood the question entirely and wrote about criminal defences, including case law such as Ahluwalia etc. These answers, unless answered in the context of precedent, did not score highly. Question 4 • Many candidates achieved the full range of marks following the preferred approach of explaining each rule, giving a case to demonstrate its application and applying it to the fact. • Question generally answered well with good use of case law. 3

REVIEW OF COMPONENT 1 Section B: Candidates have a choice between Questions 5 and 6. Question 5: • The least popular question of the two and generally weaker than Q 6. • Answers tended to be in the mid range with a lack of focus on the eligibility criteria for judges at each level. • Some mistakenly explained the eligibility of magistrates - little credit for this. Of those that did focus on the question, there was only sporadic reference to the CRA 2005 and JAC. • As with Section A, these part a) questions can be rather narrow and candidates need to be prepared for that. • Analysis and evaluation for part b) was generally poor though some excellent responses. • Weaker candidates achieved a common sense approach with some general points made regarding the importance of making a decision independent of influence but these answers tended to be unsupported and imprecise. 4

REVIEW OF COMPONENT 1 Section B: Candidates have a choice between Questions 5 and 6. Question 6: • Part a) was generally answered well, though focus was on criminal role rather than all 3 – civil, coroners and criminal. • • • 5 The majority of answers were in the mid range with most candidates able to evaluate several advantages and disadvantages of the jury system. Better responses supported their evaluation with reference to examples and legal authority while weaker responses did not include any authority, merely considering a relatively vague range of arguments. Some candidates considered some of the alternatives to the current jury system as part of their evaluation and these arguments were credited accordingly.

EXTRA RESOURCES 1. 4. Guidance for Teaching 2. Online Resources 3. ITEM LEVEL DATA You can access this via the Secure Website – your Exams Officer will give you access. 6