The document provides detailed feedback for students on improving their legal writing and understanding of law, highlighting common areas of error such as citation inaccuracies and unsubstantiated claims. Key advice includes utilizing a variety of authoritative sources, structuring arguments clearly in both macro and micro writing, and adhering to specific referencing guidelines. The document outlines necessary improvements in grammar, citation styles, and the need for a comprehensive understanding of relevant legislation and case law.

1. Student Assignment
Feedback
Some areas commonly in need of attention

2. What went wrong?
How can I improve?

3. Feedback
Plan
Implement
Reflect
Review
Improve

4. Where is the feedback?
This is feedback
Your paper is marked up
Your result is given according to a
rubric
Discussions in class

5. Demonstrated understanding
of the law
Accuracy
Was it correct
Familiarity
Was it correctly cited
Thoroughness
Were all sides covered

6. Examples of unfamiliarity with
the law: case law
Quoting a judge who does not exist
Asserting a statement of law from a case – where the
case did not find that. For example:
Re Edwards found a possessory interest, not a proprietary
interest
Referring to Supreme Court when citing a High Court
decision

7. Unfamiliarity with the law:
legislation
For involving state jurisdiction, each Australian jurisdiction
is likely to have legislation governing the issue.
Demonstrate your understanding of the issue by
identifying this, and justifying your use of a particular
example.
Eg: organ transplants are covered by most jurisdictions.
Identify the jurisdiction of the legislation you cite
Clarify that there are equivalent provisions in other
jurisdictions

8. Research
How wide; how deep; what quality…

10. Sources
Varied? Authoritative? Cited?
Second-
hand?

11. It may be
correct…
but is it
authoritative?

12. Did you explore
the issue?
Often a more circumspect
approach will garner support for
an argument.
This requires thinking around the
issue: are there other arguments?
Did you address these?

13. Did you read
widely?
Some students rely very heavily
on one or two authors for all
arguments.
The aim is to have a variety of
views, and to weave them into
your argument.

14. Did you over-
quote?
Use a variety of sources and
synthesise the sources into your
argument

15. Writing
question
parts
paragraphs
sentencesgrammar
referencing
conclusion
Macro
Micro

16. Structure: macro
Introduction
Contains
question to
be answered
Body: paras
link
One idea per
para
Argument
builds
Conclusion
matches
intro

17. Grammar: micro
Is it a
sentence?
Is it a run on
sentence?
Random
capitalisation
Apostrophes
Verb
agreement

18. Does your
sentence
represent
a complete
thought?
Or is it a
fragment?

19. “A RUN-ON
SENTENCE
(sometimes called a
‘fused sentence’)
has at least two
parts, either one of
which can stand by
itself (in other words,
two independent
clauses), but the two
parts have been
smooshed together
instead of being
properly connected.
”

20. Random Capitalisation
(see what I did there?)
“Lawyers love to capitalize words. Pleadings, including proposed
orders, are commonly full of words that are capitalized, not quite
randomly, but certainly with great abandon. Please limit the use of
capitalization to proper names. For example, do not capitalize
court, motion, movant, debtor, trustee, order, affidavit, stipulation,
mortgage, lease or any of the other numerous words that are
commonly capitalized.
”
Justice Kressel, US Bankruptcy Court
ABA Journal, 14 December 2009
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/bankruptcy_judge_orders_lawyers_to_stop_using_capitalization_with_abandon/stay_connected
/newsletter
See AGLC: rule 1.7

21. Please use apostrophes to
show possession
http://wwword.com/20/get-it-right/apostrophes/

23. Referencing
Australian Guide to Legal Citation (3rd ed)

24. Footnote follows punctuation:
rule 1.1.2
…a majority of the High Court declared an
exception to the ‘no property rule’ through the
application of the work and skill exception.1
NOT:
…exception1.

25. Subsequent references: rule
1.4
Author’s surname, above n [footnote number], pinpoint.

26. Quotes: rule 1.5.1
Longer than
three lines:
long quote
New para Indent
No quote
marks!
Smaller font
Shorter than
three lines =
short quote
Single
quote
marks! ‘

27. Headings: rule 1.15
I HEADING LEVEL ONE
A Heading Level Two
1 Heading Level Three
Avoid using more levels than this, but if need be, refer to
AGLC.

28. Cases: rule 2
Italics name v other name | (year) | Vol | Abbreviated
Reports | page
Prefer authorised version (rule 2.3.1)
Use pinpoint references (rule 2.5) but separated by a
comma; not ‘per Judge X’ or ‘at’
Do not use parallel citations (rule 2.7)

29. Legislation: rule 3
Name in italics including year (Jurisdiction)
Don’t forget the jurisdiction!
Take care how you cite jurisdictions
NSW, WA, NT, SA, ACT
Qld, Vic, Tas, Cth
If you write QLD or VIC or CTH…the reader thinks that you
are YELLING at them

30. Journal articles: rule 4
Use capitals in headings
‘Proprietary Rights in Body Parts: The Relevance of Moore's Case
in Australia’
Use single quote marks for the title
Write full journal name, in italics: Monash University Law Review
Is it an electronic journal? Or not?
Not electronic journals:
http://search.informit.com.au.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/search;rs=2;rec
=1;action=showCompleteRec
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MonashULawRw/1993/10.
html

31. Ask yourself: how can you
improve?
Research:
quality/breadth
Understanding
Writing: macro
Writing: micro

32. Kate Galloway
April, 2015