UNCLASSIFIED
30 October 2025
N Roberts
[FYI request #32439 email]
Tēnā koe N Roberts
Thank you for your request for information under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA)
dated 1 October 2025 in which you requested:
“The Faculty of Law provides the following:
“Assessment dates have been scheduled and students are expected to organise
commitments (study, work, family, etc.), to complete the assessments at the
scheduled times in the course outline.
For example, bunching or concentrations of assessments are not an accepted
reason for an extension or alternative arrangement (e.g. two assignments due
on the same day). However, a clash of timed tests would be an accepted reason.
Refer to Section 13 of the Assessment Handbook for information on approval
criteria for exceptional circumstances … ”
The statement is directly in contravention of section 6.6.2(d) of the Assessment
Handbook.
1. I understand the Handbook does allow faculties to set constraints under s
6.6(c), however, does the Faculty’s statement above wholly overrule s 6.6.2(d),
and that extensions relating to academic workload or unexpected workplace
obligations for law assessments are not considered?
2.
Furthermore, please provide all available guidelines and regulations relating
to assessment guidelines for courses run by the Faculty of Law.”
Your request has been numbered for ease of response.
Please note that part 1 of your request is not a request for information under the OIA, as the
OIA does not require the University to create new information or form an opinion in order to
provide a response. The Faculty of Law have advised they will review the wording of the
Nuku statements to identify and address any inconsistencies between the Assessment
Handbook and statements about assessments. Please contact the Faculty of Law directly for
any further questions regarding assessments.
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 2 of 2
In response to part 2 of your request, the following documents are attached:
•
Faculty of Law – Moderation procedure, dated August 2018
•
Moderation procedures – Guidelines for NZCLE moderators and university examiners
2023, dated August 2022; and
•
Grade spread guidelines, dated November 2022
The University’s Assessment handbook is refused under section 18(d) of the OIA, as it is
publicly available here
: https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/documents/policy/staff-policy/assessment-
handbook.pdf
If you have any questions about this decision, you can contact us by email at:
[VUW request email]. You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the
Ombudsman of this decision by contactin
g www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone
0800 802 602.
Nāku noa, nā
Kayana Shaw
Senior Advisor, Official Information and Privacy
Legal Services
Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington
FACULTY OF LAW
MODERATION AND ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS
Preamble:
a. University assessment and moderation procedures are set out in the
Assessment
Handbook. Each Faculty is required to adopt a moderation procedure in the light of
the requirements in the
Assessment Handbook. The
Assessment Handbook requires
other relevant matters also to be stipulated, such as tutor training.
b. This document is referred to below as the Law Faculty’s
Assessment and Moderation
Requirements. It was prepared by the Law Faculty’s Learning & Teaching Committee
1982
for the Law Faculty. It was adopted by the Faculty of Law at the meeting of 23.8.18.,
the
and approved by Academic Committee on 4.9.18.
c. The aims of this document include: (i) helping to ensure that the marking of all
assessment tasks is accurate and fair; (ii) facilitating the work of the Faculty in the
delivery of excellent teaching and assessment for our students, including innovative
Act
teaching and assessment practices; and (iii) encouraging collegial discussions about
teaching, assessment design, and marking practices.
d. The Appendix contains information about moderation that is specific to New Zealand
under
university-level schools of law: (i) inter law school peer review of examinations and
marking; and (ii) moderation of examinations in specified subjects by the Council of
Legal Education (CLE). CLE moderation is typically done by judges of New Zealand’s
superior courts and senior members of the New Zealand legal profession.
e. Where there is more than one course coordinator responsible for a course, the term
“Course Coordinator” in this document means, unless the context otherwise requires,
the Course Coordinator responsible for the part of the course in which the relevant
assessment occurs.
1
KEY RESPONSIBILITIES Information
1.1
All academic staff and other instructors who are responsible for assessment
Released
tasks should be familiar with and apply the requirements set out in the
Assessment Handbook and the Law Faculty’s
Assessment and Moderation
Requirements.
1.2
Course Coordinators have primary responsibility for ensuring that all
assessment tasks in the course comply with the
Assessment Handbook and
the Law Faculty’s
Assessment and Moderation Requirements. This includes
assessment exercises set by other academic staff and adjunct instructors
Official
involved in the course. (
Assessment Handbook ss 1.3; 1.5.6.)
1.3
Where a Course Coordinator is an adjunct instructor, the Deputy Dean
should ensure that the instructor is aware of the requirements and
responsibilities set out in the
Assessment Handbook.
4.9.19
1
2 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING
2.1
The Dean of Law should discuss with individual academic staff opportunities
for professional development in the area of assessment. PDCP meetings are
likely to be a suitable forum.
2.2
The Dean of Law is to encourage all newly-appointed permanent academic
staff and all adjunct teachers or teachers holding other short-term contract
positions to participate in a law teaching induction programme to be
coordinated by the Faculty’s Associate Dean (Learning & Teaching). This
programme should include discussion of assessment design and moderation.
The Associate Dean (Learning & Teaching) should ensure that the duration
of this programme is no more than 90 minutes. This programme is in
the 1982
addition to any training by the Centre for Academic Development (CAD) that
new academic staff might be required to undertake.
2.3
The Law Faculty Administrator responsible for managing tutor contracts will
direct all new tutors to undertake the required training that is arranged by
Act
CAD. Where it is known that a new tutor will be involved in marking that
counts toward a student’s final grade, and the tutor has not undertaken
training in marking, the tutor should undertake CAD training on marking.
under
(See
Appointments Guidelines, s 4.1).
2.4
Before the first tutorial, Course Coordinators will meet with all tutors and
discuss how the Course Coordinators would like the tutorial programme to
be conducted. All head tutors are to meet with the Associate Dean (Learning
& Teaching) to discuss the Faculty’s expectations as to tutors’ professional
responsibilities and conduct.
2.5
Tutors responsible for Māori and Pasifika (MPI) tutorials are to meet with
the Law Faculty MPI Academic Coordinator before the first tutorial in the
Information
course to discuss the Law Faculty’s expectations for MPI tutorials, including,
Released
if relevant, expectations as to assessment and moderation.
3 MODERATION
3.1
Pre-assessment moderation helps to ensure that assessment exercises align
with course learning objectives and the assessment principles and
requirements set out in the
Assessment Handbook.
Official
3.2
Moderation of marking also provides an opportunity to check that marking
is consistent and fair.
Procedures for all assessment tasks
Moderation before assigning assessment tasks
3.3
Before students are assigned an assessment task, the person setting the
4.9.19
2
assessment task should have a collegial conversation about the assessment
task with a member of the academic staff.
3.4
If the person responsible for the assessment task is
not the course
coordinator, that person should discuss the assessment task with the course
coordinator. At this stage, the assessment task should be in the form that it
is intended to be given to the students: e.g., the test paper, the instructions
for a practical exercise, etc.
3.5
The matters to be addressed in the conversation(s) described in 3.3 and 3.4
include: whether the assessment task aligns with course learning objectives
and the assessment principles set out in the
Assessment Handbook and the
Programme and Course Design Handbook; and whether the assessment
task is likely to produce an appropriate spread of grades; and whether the
material to be distributed to students is free from errors and the questions
1982
will be easily understood by students and, as relevant, markers.
the
3.6
With internal assessment exercises, such as legal opinions, essays, or oral
presentations, advance provision to students of a marking rubric (i.e. a
general statement of marking criteria) will often be an appropriate practice,
Act
and the rubric should also be discussed in the conversations required by s
3.3 and 3.4. If a marking rubric has not been provided to students, it may be
helpful to discuss the reasons for deciding not to do so.
under
3.7
If there is disagreement about to the suitability of an assessment exercise
(including, as relevant, the accompanying rubric and/or the instructions) the
course coordinator and, as relevant, the person responsible for setting the
assessment exercise should seek advice from the Associate Dean (Learning &
Teaching). Where the Associate Dean (Learning & Teaching) is also the
coordinator of the course, the matter should be referred to the Deputy Dean.
3.8
Law Faculty moderation practices must also be consistent with the following
documents:
The Use of Te Reo Māori for Assessment Policy and
Use of Te
Information
Reo Māori for Assessment Policy: Procedure for the Faculty Of Law.
Released
Moderation in the marking of assessment tasks
3.9
If there are multiple markers of the same part(s) of an assessment task, the
course coordinator should ensure that there is an appropriate process in
place for ensuring that marking is accurate and that there is consistency
between the different markers. That process should include at least the
following steps:
Official
• providing markers with a suitably detailed marking guide (i.e. a suitably
specific statement of how marks are to be awarded) directed at ensuring that
there is consistency between different markers;
• a meeting (or, if needed, a number of meetings) of markers at which
marking standards are explained and a sample of each marker’s marking is
4.9.19
3
compared; and
• “blind marking” by the course coordinator of an appropriate sample of
marked work by each marker.
With large classes in which there are multiple markers of the same part(s) of
any assessment task, the Course Coordinator should compare the spread of
grades produced by each marker, and, if necessary, adjust grades using a
sound process to achieve consistency in the marks awarded by different
markers. If the marking moderation process has been thorough, it should
rarely be necessary to use this process.
Additional procedures for examinations
3.10 Where an assessment exercise is an examination, course coordinators need
to follow the procedures under the heading “Role of External Assessors” in
1982
the Appendix, in addition to the procedures set out above.
the
3.11
Where an assessment exercise is an examination that is moderated by the
Council of Legal Education, course coordinators need to follow the
procedures under the heading “Role of CLE Moderators” in the Appendix, in
Act
addition to the procedures set out above.
under
Procedure before final results are released
3.12
The spreadsheet of marks and grades should be forwarded to the Deputy
Dean who will check whether the results are consistent with the Law
Faculty’s
Grade-Spread Guidelines. To help the Associate Dean identify
issues that would benefit from further consideration before the Examiners’
Meeting, copies of the final spreadsheets for undergraduate courses should
also to be forwarded to the Associate Dean. Final grades for a course will be
released only after consideration by the relevant Law Faculty Examiners’
Meeting. If marks or grades are changed following the Examiners’ Meeting,
Information
there should be consultation with the Course Coordinator before they are
Released
released.
3.13
The Law Faculty’s Student and Academic Services personnel are responsible
for the release of final grades.
4 MODERATION RECORD KEEPING
4.1
The Assessm
ent Handbook requires faculties to keep records of assessment
Official
moderation. Relevant record-keeping requirements set forth in the
Assessment Handbook will be administered by the examinations coordinator
(in the case of final examinations and marks) and course administrators (in
the case of all other assessment exercises).
Moderation record keeping for internal assessment exercises
4.9.19
4
4.2
At the time that marks are to be entered by the course administrators,
Course Coordinators will be asked by course administrators to confirm that
the stipulations in the Law Faculty
Assessment and Moderation
Requirements have been followed. This should take no more than 5 minutes
of a course coordinator’s time. An email template will be used.
Moderation record keeping for examinations
4.3
Course Coordinators will be asked to confirm, in Reports to the relevant
Examiners’ Meeting, that the required moderation procedures have been
followed. This should take no more than 5 minutes of a course coordinator’s
time.
5 MARKING BY TUTORS AND/OR CONTRACT MARKERS
the 1982
5.1
There is no restriction on the amount of each student’s work that can be
marked by tutors or by any other person contracted to undertake marking.
5.2
The Course Coordinator will ensure that tutors and other people who are
Act
contracted to undertake marking are provided with clear and sufficiently
detailed information as to how to perform the specific marking task.
5.3
The Course Coordinator must ensure that marking by tutors or by any other
under
person contracted to undertake marking is moderated in accordance with
the
Assessment Handbook and the Law Faculty’s
Assessment and
Moderation Requirements.
6 FINAL DECISIONS ON MARKING
6.1
Subject to s 1.6 of the
Assessment Handbook, the Head of School has
authority, after consulting with the Course Coordinator and the Associate
Dean (Learning & Teaching), to make final decisions on questions
Information
concerning marking within a course (
Assessment Handbook ss 1.5.5; 1.6).
Released
7 REQUIREMENTS FOR OVERSIGHT OF ASSESSMENT SCHEDULING
7.1
The Law Faculty’s Manager of Student and Academic Services is responsible
for the oversight of the scheduling of assessment.
8 EXAMINERS’ MEETINGS
Official
8.1
All final grades are provisional until the final grades have been confirmed by
a Meeting of the Law Faculty Examiners.
8.2
The functions of the Law Faculty Examiners’ meeting that are relevant to
moderation include:
• monitoring assessment practices in the light of applicable Law Faculty
4.9.19
5
standards and expectations;
• ensuring the marks and grades for individual courses meet Faculty
expectations (such as compliance with assessment principles set out in
the
Assessment Handbook, and achieve consistency with applicable
grade-spread guidelines, appropriate parity between equivalent courses,
robustness of any scaling methods, etc); and
• approving final course grades (subject to the Head of School’s final
approval and CLE requirements).
8.3
No final course grades will be released until they have been confirmed by the
relevant Examiners’ Meeting.
8.4
Undergraduate Examiners’ Meetings are held in July (re trimester 1
examinations), November (re trimester 2 and full-year examinations), and
1982
February (re trimester 3 examinations). Postgraduate Examiners’ Meetings
the
are held mid-March, late June, and late November.
9 REVIEW
Act
9.1
The Law Faculty Learning & Teaching Committee will review the Law
Faculty’s
Assessment and Moderation Requirements no later than 24
months after its adoption by the Law Faculty. The Academic Committee will
under
be advised of the outcome of any review.
9.2
The Associate Dean (Research) may advise the Faculty of adaptations to this
document that may be necessary in the light of particular characteristics of
the Faculty’s postgraduate programmes. Such changes should be approved
by the Law Faculty Postgraduate and Research Committee and the Law
Faculty.
9.3
The Deputy Dean (or other Law Faculty representative on the Academic
Committee) should advise the Academic Committee of major substantive
Information
changes to this document.
Released
Official
4.9.19
6
APPENDIX
EXTERNAL ASSESSMENT AND CLE MODERATION
All LAWS courses have external assessors. Some – those 200- and 300-level compulsory
LAWS courses which are mandated by the New Zealand Council of Legal Education (CLE) –
also have CLE moderators.
Role of external assessors
There are six New Zealand Law Schools. Each New Zealand Law School is, each year, paired
with another New Zealand Law School for that year. The Faculty of Law academics of one of
the two Schools comprise the external assessors for the other School for that year. For
example, the Otago Law School Course Coordinator in
Contract Law would be the external
assessor for
Contract Law at Victoria University, and
vice versa.
1982
Once a final exam paper* has been drafted, and before the exam is sat by the students, that
the
paper is sent to the relevant external assessor at the other Law School. The Course Outline
should also be sent. The external assessor’s role is to comment on the exam paper’s content,
clarity, degree of difficulty etc, and to draw attention to any typographical errors (if any).
Act
*
All final exam papers - for 100-level courses, compulsory 200- and 300-level CLE courses,
and for 300-level elective courses, but - by definition of “final exam papers” - not for courses
which are assessed by internal assessment.
After the exam has been sat, and the scripts have been marked, a selection of scripts, along
under
with the marking guide, are sent to the external assessor. A standard selection might comprise
the script(s) with the highest mark, the script(s) with the lowest passing mark, the script(s)
with the highest failing mark, and any scripts in respect of which there may be a conflict of
interest - eg the marker’s or examiner’s son or daughter or suchlike sat the exam that
year). This requirement does not exhaust other requirements that may be imposed in such
circumstances. Other scripts might also be sent, at the examiner’s discretion. The external
assessor is invited to confirm, query or comment on the marks allocated to those scripts,
particularly those sitting on a fail-pass cusp.
Role of the CLE moderators
The CLE prescribes the material which each compulsory CLE course must cover. The CLE
Information
appoints a moderator for each compulsory course. Each CLE moderator is either a Justice of
Released
the High Court or a legal practitioner. The CLE sets Guidelines for those moderators; the
Deputy Dean of Law retains copies of those Guidelines.
After the final exam paper for a CLE compulsory course has been drafted, and before the exam
is sat by the students, that paper is sent to the relevant external CLE moderator. The Course
Outline should also be sent. The CLE moderator’s role in this regard includes -
• ensuring that the exam is of a satisfactory standard;
• satisfying themselves that there has been adequate coverage of the prescription of the
Official
course as taught by each Faculty; and
• satisfying themselves that the standard of the exam is comparable between Law
Schools.
The CLE moderator – unlike the external assessor – is
not required to review a sample of
scripts after the exam has been sat and all scripts have been marked.
4.9.19
7
MODERATION PROCEDURES
GUIDELINES FOR NZCLE MODERATORS
AND UNIVERSITY EXAMINERS
2023
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Regulation 6(3) of the Professional Examinations in Law Regulations 2008 (the
Regulations) sets up the procedure for moderation of the examination papers in five of the
six New Zealand Council of Legal Education (the Council) core law subjects which the
Council requires for the LLB and LLB (Hons) degrees.
1982
1.2 The five subjects are
the
Law of Contracts
Law of Torts
Act
Criminal Law
Public Law
Property Law *
under
*Please note: Some Universities teach Property Law in separate courses as Land Law and Equity
and Succession, and one University teaches the requirement in separate courses as Property Law,
and Equity and Succession. Some Universities also teach Public Law as separate courses.
1.3 In respect of those subjects regulation 6(3) requires that the examination papers are
prepared by a University teacher and settled by that teacher and a moderator appointed by
the Council.
1.4 The moderation requirement also applies for core law subjects taught in any summer
school programme, and to the course in Legal Ethics which is required for admission.
Information
1.5 The moderation requirement does not apply to the remaining core law subject, ie Legal
Released
System, because of the variations between Legal System courses, and the introductory
nature of the course. However the content of the course is prescribed (see Appendix 1).
2.
OBLIGATIONS ON MODERATORS
2.1 Moderators should
Official
(i)
ensure that the examination paper is of a satisfactory standard;
(ii) satisfy themselves that there has been adequate coverage of the prescription of the
course as taught by each Faculty in the particular year (see Appendices 1 and 2);
(iii) satisfy themselves that the standard of examination paper is comparable between
Faculties;
(iv) return the paper to the examiner within the time frame fixed by the Dean of each
Law Faculty. (See paragraph 4.1(ii).)
1
2.2 Moderators should also ensure that they
(i)
prepare a report on the moderation exercise for their courses by the date notified by the
Chief Executive for presentation to the Council, and send it to the Chief Executive of the
Council by the due date; and
(ii) confirm whether they are available to serve for the following year by the date notified by
the Chief Executive.
2.3 The reports referred to in paragraph 2.2(i) need not be lengthy, but if moderators have
particular concerns these should be specified in enough detail to enable the Council to take
any necessary action.
3.
OBLIGATIONS ON EXAMINERS
3.1 Examiners must provide the moderator in the course with a copy of the draft examination
paper(s), and should do so within the time frame fixed by the Dean of each Law Faculty.
1982
(See paragraph 4.1(i).)
the
3.2 Examiners should also provide the following background information
Data
Time to be provided
Act
(i)
a course outline (and, if available, copies
at the start of the course
of contents pages of course materials)
(see also paragraph 6)
(ii)
a statement of the issues the examiner
when submitting draft
under
expects the student to address in
examination paper
answering the problem question(s)
(iii)
authorities the examiner expects the
when submitting draft
student to cite in answering the
examination paper
question(s)
(iv)
copies of any terms tests and/or
when submitting draft
assignments which contributed to the
examination paper
final assessment
Information
4.
OBLIGATIONS ON LAW DEANS
Released
4.1 As soon as the university’s printing schedule is known, the Dean of each Law Faculty is
responsible for reporting to each moderator
(i) the date when the examiners’ question papers will be with the moderator;
(ii) the date by which the return of papers is required.
4.2 Ideally the examination papers should be returned to the examiner within 14 days after
Official
receipt of the paper by the moderator.
5.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
5.1 Ideally the moderator and examiner should consult fully, and discuss with one another any
matters that may arise in respect of a particular paper. In this way, queries and disputes
will usually be resolved by discussion, and will rarely involve the Council.
2
5.2 Where a matter cannot be resolved, before having recourse to regulation 6.5, the moderator
will refer the matter to the relevant Dean.
5.3 Thereafter, the Regulations provide that
Any disagreement between teacher and moderator as to the content of any examination paper
shall have been referred for final decision to a person appointed by the Chairperson of the
Council of Legal Education after consultation with the Vice-Chancellor of the University
holding the examination (regulation 6(5)).
5.4 This procedure is rarely invoked and is regarded as one of last resort.
6.
COURSE OUTLINES
6.1 The following course outline guidelines have been prepared by the Deans of the six Law
Faculties. The Council’s expectation is that course outlines for the compulsory subjects
will conform to these basic guidelines.
1982
the
6.2 Course Outlines Guidelines
1
Timing
The course outline should be sent to moderators by the end of March each year.1
Act
2
Headings
The course outline should address the following headings:
under
-
Course objectives
This will set out the basic learning objectives for the course
-
Course assessment
This will set out the percentage and type of assessment
-
Topics covered in the course
This will set out the areas of law the course will cover in summary form.
7.
SPECIFIC COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS
Information
Final Examination/Internal Assessment Ratio: The Sixty/Forty Rule
Released
7.1 (i)
In NZCLE core law subjects and Legal Ethics the Council requires that the final
examination2 must count for at least 50% of the final grade, and internal assessment
for no more than 50%.
(ii) A moderator must moderate at least 50% of the course. In-term work such as tests
and opinions should be sent to the moderator, not for moderation purposes, but to
ensure that the moderator receives an overview of the course.3
Official
(iii) Although the Legal System courses are not moderated, the processes in paragraph
7.1 (i) and (ii) should be followed.
1 Or by the end of two weeks into the course for a second semester, or a summer school course.
2 Final examination refers to a final, end of course examination.
3 See Council Minutes, April 1995, April 2001, October 2001, November 2020.
3
Legal Ethics
Content of examination
7.2 In respect of the content of the Legal Ethics course the Council has resolved that the course
involves teaching
(a)
an introduction to ethical analysis including an examination of various theories of
ethics; and
(b)
the practical application of legal professional ethics,
and that the examination should appropriately test both components.
7.3 The Council would expect that at least one problem question focussing on the practical
application of legal professional ethics would be the most effective way to test the second
component.4
Stage at which Legal Ethics is taught in the degree
the 1982
7.4 The Council has resolved that the Legal Ethics course be taught at all Universities at 300 or
400 level.5
Act
Take Home Examinations in Core Law Subjects and Legal Ethics
7.5 The Council has resolved not to approve a policy allowing a take home final examination
in a core law subject or a Legal Ethics course.6
under
August 2022
Released
Information
Official
4 See Council Minutes, October 2001.
5 See Council Minutes, October 2001.
6 See Council Minutes, April 2007.
4
APPENDIX 1
PRESCRIPTIONS FOR COMPULSORY SUBJECTS
(Regulation 3(2)(a) and Schedule 2 of the Professional
Examinations in Law Regulations 2008)
THE LEGAL SYSTEM (One Paper)
An introduction to the New Zealand legal system. Legal reasoning and the judicial process,
including selected problems in statutory interpretation. Selected legal institutions in England and
New Zealand. Selected legal concepts. This subject may include studies in the history of law
1982
and legal institutions in England and New Zealand.
the
OR
An historical introduction to, and a descriptive outline of, the legal systems in England and New
Act
Zealand, including the structure of government, civil and criminal proceedings, the sources of
law and the main divisions of substantive law. Legal reasoning and the judicial process,
including an introduction to statutory interpretation. An elementary treatment of legal concepts.
under
THE LAW OF CONTRACTS (One paper)
The general principles of the law of contract and agency.
THE LAW OF TORTS (One paper)
General principles of civil liability. The law as to the various kinds of torts. The law relating to
compensation for personal injury by accident in New Zealand.
Information
Released
CRIMINAL LAW (One paper)
The general principles of criminal liability.
[Amended 2017]
PUBLIC LAW (One paper)
Official
The principles and working of the constitution, the institutions of government, the exercise of
public power and relations between the citizen and the state. Controls on the exercise of public
power, including an introduction to judicial review.
5
PROPERTY LAW (One paper)
An introduction to the law relating to property, both legal and equitable.
[The subjects of Land Law and Equity and the Law of Succession are treated as the equivalent of
Property Law. The prescriptions for these courses are:]
LAND LAW (One paper)
The history and principles of Land Law.
EQUITY AND THE LAW OF SUCCESSION (One paper)
The principles of equity with particular reference to the law of trusts. The principles of the law
of succession and of the administration of estates. Choses in action and the assignment thereof.
the 1982
Act
under
Information
Released
Official
6
APPENDIX 2
PRESCRIPTION FOR LEGAL ETHICS
(Regulation 3(2)(c) and Schedule 3 of the
Professional Examinations in Law Regulations 2008
1
An introduction to ethical analysis including an examination of various theories of ethics.
2
The applicability of ethical analysis to legal practice.
3
The concept of a profession and the ethical and professional duties of practitioners (which
will include, among other topics, conflicts of interest, confidentiality, duties to the Court,
duties of loyalty and fidelity).
1982
the
4
The wider responsibilities of lawyers in the community.
Act
under
Information
Released
Official
7
GRADE-SPREAD GUIDELINES AS AT 11 November 2022
Grade curves for passing scripts
1. The marking curves for LAWS 121, 122, 123, 211, 212, 213, 214, and 297 shall be as follows:
• A-range grades: 15% of passing scripts (with a minimum of 10% A-range grades but otherwise
with a 10% tolerance i.e. up to 25%).
• B-range grades: 45% of passing scripts (with a 10%tolerance, i.e. 35%-55%).
• C-range grades: 40% of passing scripts (with a 10% tolerance i.e. 30%-50%).
Agreed practise is that grade curves falling outside the tolerance must be discussed with the AD
(Learning and Teaching) before the Examiners’ Meeting.
Al course results should include some A+ plus grades.
2. The marking curves for al other LAWS courses (at 300-level, including LAWS 301, 312 and 334) shall
the 1982
be as follows:
• A-range grades: 20% of passing scripts (with a minimum of 15% A-range grades but otherwise
with a tolerance of 10%; i.e. 15%-30%).
• B-range grades: 60% of passing scripts (with a tolerance of 10% - i.e. 50%-70%).
Act
• C-range grades: 20% of passing scripts (with a tolerance of 10% - i.e. 10%-30%).
Note: LAWS 301 and 312 were moved from Category 1 to Category 2 at the Faculty Meeting of 26 May 2016.
Agreed practise is that grade curves falling outside the tolerance must be discussed with the AD
under
(Learning and Teaching) before the Examiners’ Meeting.
Al course results should include some A+ plus grades.
3. The Examiners’ Meeting has the discretion to accept and, in exceptional cases, approve results that do
not conform to the grade distribution in 1 and 2 above. Reasons for deviation may include class size,
assessment method, etc.
Pass / Fail expectations
Information
4. There are no set minimum pass or maximum fail percentages (“pass/fail ratio”) for any course or level of
Released
courses, but there is an expectation that –
a) As regards the end-of-course/aggregate results, the pass/fail ratio in each of the 200-level courses
wil be similar in any given year; and
b) As regards the end-of-course/aggregate results, the pass/fail ratio in each of the 200-level courses
wil be similar from year to year; and
Official
c) (i)
as regards items of in-term assessment and the final examination in each of the 200-level
courses, the maximum permitted percentage of failing grades for each item is 20%; and
(ii)
as regards the end-of-course/aggregate results in each of the 200-level courses, the
maximum permitted percentage of failing grades is 15%.
Page
1 of
2
d) The expected pass rate (calculated with reference to those who sit the final examination) for LAWS
121, 122, and 123 be at least 85%;
e) The expected maximum permitted percentage of failing grades for any item of final and in-term
assessment in each of the 100-level courses be 20% calculated with reference to those who sit that
individual assessment, to align with the guidelines for 200-level courses adopted at the May 2015
Faculty Meeting.
Note: d) and e) were added in November 2022 in light of the resolutions adopted in 2019. See Faculty Board
Minutes of 5 October 2019 at [5.13], [5.35] and [5.36]
For the avoidance of doubt, the percentages at (c)(i) and (ii), (d) and (e) above are expected
maximum permitted percentages of failing grades; they are
not targets for failing grades. Faculty
expectations are that percentages of failing grades in each of the 200-level items of in-term
assessment and the end-of-course/aggregate results wil ordinarily be below the maxima set out
above.
1982
Updated 11 November 2022 (to reflect resolutions from earlier Faculty Board meetings).
the Act
under
Released
Information
Official
Page
2 of
2
