You are on page 1of 5


EXAM QUESTIONS FOR AUG 2013 TIPS FOR NCA CANDIDATES: 1. Though the instructions say that any reference material may be brought into the exam hall, Christine Meyer, the examinations manager has authorized an unreasonable search and seizure of any material that is a past NCA sample exam or answer. That paranoia has led the proctors to search for any document related to the words answer, questions, sample, exam. There is really no need to carry any past NCA sample exam into the hall. If you read this for exam, leave it at home or in the bag. If however, you want to carry sample answers to the questions below in, simply re-label your title to say case study or case example etc. 2. Someone should file a case against Christine Meyer for unlawful search and seizure and violation of Charter rights. The exam note also says that we should not discuss the questions with each other that is all rubbish and is a violation of our freedom to speech. This is one of the reasons I have decided to post this. 3. Good luck. I have not given my contact details as I do not wish to be contacted. Thank you. Criminal law exam section B, Aug 16, 2013 1. X committed murder and was committed for preliminary enquiry for trial. During the course of preliminary enquiry, it emerges that Xs friend who was giving evidence against X was dishonest in previous cases; a hair microscopy report was not conclusive of Xs involvement; a gun that x owns had same caliber of murder weapon. Also, Crown verbally receives hair microscopy report that may doubt involvement of X but Crown does not share it with defense right away since Crown doesnt want to share verbal report but was waiting for final written report as based on Crowns experience, verbal reports in the past have changed. Judge discharges X on basis of Xs friend having tainted reputation; controversy over the hair microscopy; and supposedly unethical behavior of Crown in not sharing the verbal report. Questions: 45 marks 1. Should the judge have discharged X? Explain. 2. If Crown wants to still indict X despite discharge, what should Crown do? If Crown wants to challenge prel inquiry decision, what is the route? 3. Was Crown behaving ethically? Explain. 1

2. Regulatory question Hannah, 18 years old served liquor by Zack at liquor store. S 30 (1) of Liquor Control Act states that if liquor is sold knowingly to a person who appears to be under 19 years, person can be fined and or imprisoned for 6 months. Zack didnt think Hannah was under 19 years and so sold her the liquor. Hannah drank liquor on her own; met some boys later on initiated some sexual contact with one of the boys; and George piled her with liquor. She falls asleep on George and gets up while sexual stuff going on. Suddenly, she gets up struggling, starts vomiting. George calls 911. Medical personnel incorrectly inserts trachea that then kills Hannah. Expert says that if tube was inserted correctly, Hannah would not have died. Questions: 55 marks. 1. Can Zack be convicted of supplying liquor to Hannah? 2. Can George be convicted of sexual assault against Hannah? 3. Can George be convicted of manslaughter against Hannah? 4. Assume George had defense of extreme intoxication based on the offence and other defences, can George be convicted of offence? Constitutional law exam, section A: Aug 15, 2013 1. Division of powers question. Long-winded question on Federal Govt. saving a company for the whole of Canada, to help Canadas economy and this Company then applies under the Federal Act to severe employees under s 3 which asks for directions from a Judge to do so. Meanwhile, under Employees Services Act of Ontario, employees want to be paid their remaining amounts. You represent the employees. Can employees challenge the Federal legislation and how? - 35 marks, 60 minutes. 2. Charter question for 50 marks. Long-winded question with needless facts to confuse the reader. Basically, Betty, a Buddhist and artist specializing in body-piercing etc. wants to open a shop on body-piercing in a small town. Mayor is outraged after seeing her display. He whips up towns emotions citing health problems, undesirable elements coming to the area etc in passing a specific regulation disallowing the opening of body-piercing shops. Her business is forcibly closed. You represent her. What are the various Charter arguments that Betty can raise? 2

- 50 marks, 90 minutes. 3. 15 mark essay question (30 min) on if and whether Constitution of Canada has helped disadvantaged and minorities in Canada. Administrative law exam, section A: Aug 14, 2013 1. Extremely long-winded factual situation. Basically, some fight between council members on a school board. Parents divided. Minister intervenes and after some warning, uses his discretionary power to verbally announce his decision to sack board members and arbitrarily appoint others on board for sake of board. Questions: 70 marks 1. What are the various procedural fairness issues involved for parents and board members (in the facts, there are various instances where notice wasnt given; no hearing; arbitrary appointment etc). 2. What standard of review to apply for Ministers decision? 3. Once standard has been decided, what is the correct decision to be applied in the case? Can the decision made by Minister overruled? 4. Can Ministers discretionary announcement / decision be challenged? 5. Parents file a case. Can parents even challenge the decision? Q 2. Long-winded factual situation about procurement issue gone awry. A contactor X loses on the bid. His sub-contractor, Y too loses as a result and learns that the rival company selected was selected due to possible fraud in selection process. Y decides to appeal. Appeal board issues preliminary decision that losing contractor has no locus standii to appeal since this was not originally recognized by the Legislature in passing the Act as otherwise, Legislature would have specifically mentioned this in the Act. Questions, 30 marks 1. Can Y appeal? What are the possible impediments to appealing the preliminary decision? 2. What is the standard of review to be applied in reviewing the preliminary decision and why? 3. Once standard has been applied, what decision will Court come to and why? Please note: another Group in the exam, section C, got similar fact situations but also had an essay question to answer for 15 marks on Diceys functional approach

(probably something to do with the origination of the pragmatic and functional approach). Foundations of Canadian Law, Aug 19, 2013 Section B: Q 1: Short answers (20 marks) 1. Question on bijuralism. 2. Question on why Canada is considered legally plurastic and to explain. 3. Meaning of complemtarity between Federal and Provincial legislation and to give example. 4. Meaning of harmonization between Common and civil laws and to give example from Quebec. Q 2: Essay (15 marks) Federal Govt. enters into various binding contracts with companies at Pearson airport and then, passes law repudiating such contracts and bars companies from accessing Courts. Professor Monahan states that such actions by the Federal Govt. is arbitrary and high-handed and is against the rule of law. Do you agree with Prof Monahan and why or why not? Will the Supreme Court agree? Why or why not? Q 3: essay questions (8 x 2 = 16 marks) Mayor of Toronto wants your advice on the following two issues: a. Mayor causes City to pass law against every retailer banning Toronto Star; Can Mayor / City do this? b. Mayor wants to meet Chief Justice to lobby for stronger convictions against drug problem in poorer areas of Toronto. Can Mayor do this? Why or why not? Q 4: essay question (15 marks) If Ontario had codified law on defamation prior to the Hill decision, would the judgment have been different? Why or why not? Explain fully. Q 5: True or false with brief explanation (12 marks) 4

1. Fiduciary obligations flow from s 35(1). 2. The manner in which fiduciary obligations flow from Provinces depends on how s 35(1) is influenced. 3. Inferior (provincial) courts do not have the authority to decide cases relating to fiduciary obligations because of the Chancery. 4. Legal positivists believe that fiduciary obligations flowing are all fluff since it is based on fairness and equity. Q 6: essay (12 marks) Premise: International law is ratified and entered into by Federal Govt. Conclusion: Federal Govt. implements law. Is conclusion and / or premise true or false. Explain. Q 7: short question (10 marks) What is important about Van Der Peet? Do not repeat facts. Group A got questions on the shark-fin ban (a repeat from previous exam with some modifications) and on statutory interpretation.