Exam (elaborations)
AQA A-Level 2023 Paper 1 Examiners Report
- Course
- Institution
Full examiners report
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
finn8
Content preview
A-LEVELLAW
7162/1 Paper 1
Report on the Examination
7162/1
June 2023
Version: 1.0
,Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk
Copyright © 2023 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved.
AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this
booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any
material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.
, REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL LAW – 7162/1 – JUNE 2023
Introduction
From this exam season it was evident that there were some impressive answers across the range
of questions and it was pleasing to see that there were fewer instances of the question not being
attempted particularly for Questions 09, 10 and 11.
Students should be reminded to focus directly on the specific requirements of the question as
conveyed by the instruction. For example, question 07 directed students to deal with actus reus in
relation to a battery, however, many focussed on the mens rea.
In Questions 10 and 11, students were required to deal with the identification, explanation and
application of substantive law arising out of the facts in a scenario. As in previous years, a number
of students failed to identify and explain the full range of issues presented in the scenario.
In addition, Question 11 required application of some aspect of the English Legal System, a large
number of students addressed only the substantive law aspect in this question.
Question 01
The correct answer was D
‘The defendant’s mental functioning was substantially impaired’
This answer was selected by about 85% of students, showing good understanding of the defence
of diminished responsibility.
The most common wrong answer was A which related to the defence of loss of control.
Question 02
The correct answer was A
‘A person may be liable even though they took all reasonable care’
This answer was selected by about 70% of students.
The most common wrong answers were B and C. B was incorrect because although many strict
liability offences are punishable with a fine, others, for example those within the Road Traffic Act
relating to driving under the influence, can be punishable by a term of imprisonment.
C was incorrect because actus reus must be present, however mens rea does not need to be
proven.
Question 03
The correct answer was C
‘Magistrates can try indictable only offences’
This answer was selected by about 65% of students.
The most common wrong answer was D. This answer was incorrect because an appeal against
the decision of the magistrates' court can be heard by a judge and magistrate(s) in the Crown
Court.
3 of 11
, REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL LAW – 7162/1 – JUNE 2023
Question 4
The correct answer was D
‘The defendant’s trial will involve consideration of a substantial point of law’
This answer was selected by about 65% of students.
D is correct as it appears within the interests of justice test.
About 25% of students incorrectly selected B. This was incorrect as previous convictions will not be
considered as part of the interests of justice test when deciding eligibility for state funding.
Question 05
The correct answer was D
‘The defendant used a weapon during the offence’
This answer was selected by about 85% of students.
Incorrect answers A, B and C were selected in almost equal proportions. They were incorrect
answers because they relate to mitigating factors in sentencing.
Question 06
This question required students to explain two aspects of the role of the judge in a criminal case.
The expectation was that students would be able to identify and briefly explain any two of the
following:
• conducting a pre-trial preparation hearing: determining any pre-trial issues, eg fixing a trial date,
granting of bail etc.
• controlling the conduct of the trial: opportunity for each side to present its case fully; rulings on
the admissibility of evidence
• determining the interpretation and application of law: giving directions on law to the jury in a
Crown Court trial
• summing-up the evidence in the case in a Crown Court trial
• sentencing in consequence of a conviction or guilty plea
Many students were able to identify two of the above and offer some explanation. Those who
offered no explanation or only identified one aspect could not access the highest band.
Frequently students wrote about sentencing, however few offered any further explanation. Stronger
answers added that this occurs after conviction or guilty plea. Others also included reference to
aggravating and mitigating factors that may be considered when sentencing.
A high number of students stated that a judge will decide the verdict within a criminal case. To gain
full credit for this aspect students needed to add that this will be done by District Judges
(Magistrates' courts).
Question 07
In question 07 the facts of the scenario were that Adil pushed Bina towards a crowd of people. The
force from the push caused Bina to fall against Caleb, knocking him off balance.
4 of 11
, REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL LAW – 7162/1 – JUNE 2023
The question directed students to suggest why Bina does not satisfy the required actus reus for the
offence of battery against Caleb.
A good answer required:
- An outline explanation of the actus reus of battery
- Explanation and application relating to the need for an act forming the actus reus to be
voluntary.
- Concluding that because Bina had no control over her movement she did not satisfy the
actus reus for battery.
Answers that followed the structure above scored highly and, although not required, many students
were able to make good use of cases such as Hill v Baxter to support their answers. Other good
answers considered automatism to support their conclusion.
In any question worth five marks students need to be particularly careful not to cover material that
is not relevant. Many low scoring answers did not follow the question’s direction and offered
detailed discussion of Adil’s criminal liability and transferred malice. Although these answers often
showed correct legal explanation they did not address the question asked and could not receive
credit.
Question 08
In question 08 the facts of the scenario were that Dan was helping his neighbour, Emma, build a
patio and instead of putting waste plants in the rubbish bin he removed them and planted them in
his own garden. After completing the project Emma asked Dan to take £20 from her bag but he
took £30 instead. The question directed students to advise Dan of his criminal liability for theft.
A good answer required:
- Explanation of the actus reus and mens rea of the offence of theft
- Analysis and application of the actus reus and mens rea of theft in relation to the facts
Students appeared well prepared for this question and followed a logical approach by explaining
and applying each element of theft before reaching a conclusion.
When addressing the actus reus strong answers outlined the elements (appropriation, property,
belonging to another) and included relevant authority. When discussing appropriation many
students discussed the appropriation of the plants when Dan took them and planted them in his
own garden. However, few students addressed the issue of consent to the initial appropriation of
the plants, as well as consent to appropriation of the £20, though not the additional £10.
When discussing types of property within the scenario many students outlined section 4(1) of the
Theft Act concluding that the additional £10 and the plants amount to property.
Strong answers cited s4(2)(b) and recognised that when severed from the land, although always
property, the plants could now be ‘stolen’. They connected the appropriation subsequent to
severing the plants to conclude that there was a dishonest, appropriation of property when Dan
moved the plants (without permission) and replanted them in his own garden.
Weaker answers failed to recognise, based on the facts, that the plants were growing in Emma’s
garden and were not growing ‘wild’. Due to this error many students incorrectly applied the law
concluding that the plants would not be considered property.
Next students should consider whether or not the property would be classed as belonging to
another. Strong answers stated that the £10 still belonged to Emma as Dan was not instructed to
5 of 11
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller finn8. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $7.67. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
76449 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now