Subjects under University of New South Wales
Document Details

Introducing Law and Justice Mid-Session

User Description:
introduce law and justice mid-session assignment as to statutory interpretation and tort.

Thinkswap Satisfaction Guarantee

Each document purchased on Thinkswap is covered by our Satisfaction Guarantee policy. If you are not satisfied with the quality of any document, or you believe the document was incorrectly described or categorised, Thinkswap will provide a full refund of exchange credits so you can check out another document. For more information please click here.

This student studied:
Claim a Thinkswap Bounty

Do you know if the Subject listed above has changed recently? Click report to earn free Exchange Credits!

Document Information:
8 Pages Essays / Projects 1-2 Years old
Share

2 Ex Credits


Document Screenshots:
Introducing Law and Justice Mid-Session
Topics this document covers:
Malayali people Meena Tamil people Crimes Act South India Tamil Cinema of India Indian films Jeremy v Meena
This is an Essay / Project

Essays / Projects are typically greater than 5 pages in length and are assessments that have been previously submitted by a student for academic grading.

What are Exchange Credits:

Exchange Credits represent the worth of each document on Thinkswap. In exchange for uploading documents you will receive credits. These can then be used to checkout other documents on Thinkswap.

Topics this document covers:
Malayali people Meena Tamil people Crimes Act South India Tamil Cinema of India Indian films Jeremy v Meena
Sample Text:
Meena’s act did not have Hien’s consent, Meena had no lawful justification. These elements potentially constitute the battery. Alternatively, certain dissenting voices may come from the fact that Meena did not physically contact with the Hien, so it could not constitute the battery.1 But it is not necessary that Meena should physically touch Hien, throwing at Hien still constitutes the interference.2 Everyone is inviolate, so any toughing of others, however slight might be regarded as the battery.3 Therefore, Meena was likely to commit battery to Hien. Jeremy v Hien: Battery It was a positive act that Jeremy squirted water in Hien’s eyes. Although Jeremy did not directly touch Hien, it still, in fact, amounted to the physical interference.4 But consent is a defence to a battery.5 People ...
Similar Documents to Introducing Law and Justice Mid-Session

No related items were found.