A. Explain what the ratio decidendi of a case is and how you might find the...

Transcribed Image Text:

A. Explain what the ratio decidendi of a case is and how you might find the ratio of the case. Is it possible for a case not to have a ratio? Explain why or why not. B. Explain the common law principle of res judicata. You must discuss the principle, its elements and the exceptions to this principle. C. It is understood that the principle of autrefois acquit/convict (or double jeopardy) is an old but very controversial rule of common law. Define what the principle of autrefois acquit/convict is and identify three reasons why the rule should be changed and two reasons why the rule should not be changed. D. What is the doctrine of precedent? What are the elements of the doctrine of precedent? The Esi family have lived on an area of land called "Vai" for five generations and believed that they were the customary owners of the land. Vai is located on the waterfront in Vila Village which is located near the capital city of Pacifica. Its location makes it a prime piece of property. In 1999, the Fa'i family made a claim in the Pacifica Land Court that they were the rightful custom owners of the Vai area. The claim was brought by Chief Keke Fa'i on behalf of the members of his family. The Fa'i family argued that their great-great grandfather High Chief Sua Fa'i had allowed his distant cousin Koko Esi (Esi family ancestor) to live on the land and serve the family. During the hearing at the Pacifica Land Court in 1999, Paramount Chief Kukama gave evidence that under Pacifica custom, land that is given to a family member is treated as a gift and ownership is transferred to the family member and to their descendants. Based on the evidence given by Chief Kukama, the Pacifica Land Court held that the Esi family were the rightful custom owners of the land. In 2019, the Government of Pacifica released their plans to convert the Vila Village Waterfront into a Government wharf. According to the press release, the Government would be paying five million dollars per acre. The "Vai" land area covered ten acres of land on the waterfront which would amount to a payout of fifty million dollars. This came to the attention of Fa'alifu Fa'i, the grandson of Keke Fa'i. Fa'alifu had recently completed his law degree at USP. Upon consulting the elders of his family, Fa'alifu brought a claim against the Esi family in the Pacifica Land Court to challenge the ownership of "Vai land area. You are a newly appointed judge for the Pacifica Land Court. A. Using the IRAC method, determine whether the principle of res judicata would apply to the new claim brought by Fa'alifu Fa'i? You must cite case law in support of your answer. (10 marks) B. Would your answer to (A) be different if it was uncovered that High Chief Kukama had been given ten fine mats and one thousand dollars by the Esi family to give evidence on their behalf in the 1999 trial? You must give an explanation for your answer. (5 marks) On 31 December 2019, Masi gave Popo a cooler of fish to take from Port-Vila to Suva. Popo was not aware that Masi had lined the walls of the cooler with two kilograms of methamphetamines (crystal meth) to be sold in Suva. The cooler was blue and contained frozen whole yellowfin tuna. On 1 January 2020 at about 7:30 am, Popo's plane from Port-Vila arrived at the Nausori airport. While the passengers were disembarking from the plane, a sniffer dog sniffed the cooler of fish and began to bark. The sniffer dog guide who was a policeman opened the cooler without Popo's consent and found the white powder that lined the walls of the cooler. The policeman confiscated the powder and sent it to be analysed by the chemistry laboratory in Suva. The government analyst who normally does these tests and gives expert witness evidence in Court was not present. Instead, her assistant, a junior lab technician completed the test and gave evidence that the powder was crystal meth. Crystal meth is an illicit (illegal) drug according to the Illicit Drugs Control Act (Act). Under the Act, it is an offence to be in possession of an illicit drug. Popo is a young woman with fair skin and long black hair. She was wearing a white tee shirt and ripped dark blue jeans. Moli, who was also on the same flight, also has fair skin and long black hair. She was dressed similarly to Popo and had also checked in a blue cooler. The police relied on an old camera which recorded vague footage of someone that looked like Moli wheeling a blue cooler to be checked in at the Air Vanuatu terminal. The camera was installed in 1995 and located right at the end of the terminal to capture the movements of people. On the sole basis of that vague CCTV footage, the police arrested and charged Moli for the offence of being in possession of illicit drugs. When interviewed under caution, Moli denied the allegation. During the High Court trial, Moli's lawyer vigorously cross examined the prosecution witnesses as per his instructions from Moli. The prosecution completed its case and the Judge found a case to answer. Moli gave her evidence denying the allegation. A. As a judge in this case, discuss the need for identification warning requirements enunciated in the case of R v Turnbull et al [1977] QB 224 ALL ER 549. (5 marks) B. Identify five of the evidentiary issues that arise in the above scenario. Discuss how these issues are normally selected and analysed by the prosecution for the purpose of a criminal trial. (5 marks) C. The High Court finds Moli not guilty at first instance for the offence of possession of an illicit drug. This angers the Director of Public Prosecutions, who then decides to bring a charge of "importing an illicit drug" against Moli. Discuss whether the principle of autrefois convict/acquit applies to the subsequent charge. (10 marks) A. Explain what the ratio decidendi of a case is and how you might find the ratio of the case. Is it possible for a case not to have a ratio? Explain why or why not. B. Explain the common law principle of res judicata. You must discuss the principle, its elements and the exceptions to this principle. C. It is understood that the principle of autrefois acquit/convict (or double jeopardy) is an old but very controversial rule of common law. Define what the principle of autrefois acquit/convict is and identify three reasons why the rule should be changed and two reasons why the rule should not be changed. D. What is the doctrine of precedent? What are the elements of the doctrine of precedent? The Esi family have lived on an area of land called "Vai" for five generations and believed that they were the customary owners of the land. Vai is located on the waterfront in Vila Village which is located near the capital city of Pacifica. Its location makes it a prime piece of property. In 1999, the Fa'i family made a claim in the Pacifica Land Court that they were the rightful custom owners of the Vai area. The claim was brought by Chief Keke Fa'i on behalf of the members of his family. The Fa'i family argued that their great-great grandfather High Chief Sua Fa'i had allowed his distant cousin Koko Esi (Esi family ancestor) to live on the land and serve the family. During the hearing at the Pacifica Land Court in 1999, Paramount Chief Kukama gave evidence that under Pacifica custom, land that is given to a family member is treated as a gift and ownership is transferred to the family member and to their descendants. Based on the evidence given by Chief Kukama, the Pacifica Land Court held that the Esi family were the rightful custom owners of the land. In 2019, the Government of Pacifica released their plans to convert the Vila Village Waterfront into a Government wharf. According to the press release, the Government would be paying five million dollars per acre. The "Vai" land area covered ten acres of land on the waterfront which would amount to a payout of fifty million dollars. This came to the attention of Fa'alifu Fa'i, the grandson of Keke Fa'i. Fa'alifu had recently completed his law degree at USP. Upon consulting the elders of his family, Fa'alifu brought a claim against the Esi family in the Pacifica Land Court to challenge the ownership of "Vai land area. You are a newly appointed judge for the Pacifica Land Court. A. Using the IRAC method, determine whether the principle of res judicata would apply to the new claim brought by Fa'alifu Fa'i? You must cite case law in support of your answer. (10 marks) B. Would your answer to (A) be different if it was uncovered that High Chief Kukama had been given ten fine mats and one thousand dollars by the Esi family to give evidence on their behalf in the 1999 trial? You must give an explanation for your answer. (5 marks) On 31 December 2019, Masi gave Popo a cooler of fish to take from Port-Vila to Suva. Popo was not aware that Masi had lined the walls of the cooler with two kilograms of methamphetamines (crystal meth) to be sold in Suva. The cooler was blue and contained frozen whole yellowfin tuna. On 1 January 2020 at about 7:30 am, Popo's plane from Port-Vila arrived at the Nausori airport. While the passengers were disembarking from the plane, a sniffer dog sniffed the cooler of fish and began to bark. The sniffer dog guide who was a policeman opened the cooler without Popo's consent and found the white powder that lined the walls of the cooler. The policeman confiscated the powder and sent it to be analysed by the chemistry laboratory in Suva. The government analyst who normally does these tests and gives expert witness evidence in Court was not present. Instead, her assistant, a junior lab technician completed the test and gave evidence that the powder was crystal meth. Crystal meth is an illicit (illegal) drug according to the Illicit Drugs Control Act (Act). Under the Act, it is an offence to be in possession of an illicit drug. Popo is a young woman with fair skin and long black hair. She was wearing a white tee shirt and ripped dark blue jeans. Moli, who was also on the same flight, also has fair skin and long black hair. She was dressed similarly to Popo and had also checked in a blue cooler. The police relied on an old camera which recorded vague footage of someone that looked like Moli wheeling a blue cooler to be checked in at the Air Vanuatu terminal. The camera was installed in 1995 and located right at the end of the terminal to capture the movements of people. On the sole basis of that vague CCTV footage, the police arrested and charged Moli for the offence of being in possession of illicit drugs. When interviewed under caution, Moli denied the allegation. During the High Court trial, Moli's lawyer vigorously cross examined the prosecution witnesses as per his instructions from Moli. The prosecution completed its case and the Judge found a case to answer. Moli gave her evidence denying the allegation. A. As a judge in this case, discuss the need for identification warning requirements enunciated in the case of R v Turnbull et al [1977] QB 224 ALL ER 549. (5 marks) B. Identify five of the evidentiary issues that arise in the above scenario. Discuss how these issues are normally selected and analysed by the prosecution for the purpose of a criminal trial. (5 marks) C. The High Court finds Moli not guilty at first instance for the offence of possession of an illicit drug. This angers the Director of Public Prosecutions, who then decides to bring a charge of "importing an illicit drug" against Moli. Discuss whether the principle of autrefois convict/acquit applies to the subsequent charge. (10 marks)

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Answer Lets tackle the legal questions presented using the IRAC method A Application of Res Judicata 1 IssueDoes the principle of res judicata apply to the new claim brought by Faalifu Fai challenging ... View the full answer