An important skill that law students need to learn in their first year of study is the ability to

critically analyse and solve legal problem scenarios. The IRAC method is used to assist

students in conducting their analysis and structuring their legal arguments.

Bey Cartier was a well-known female musician who lived in Pacifica. Bey was married to a

rapper named Jay and had three children: Azul, Rumi and Senor. Jay was scheduled to start his

four month Pacifica tour on 2 September 2019 for his new album "Wish I was a USP Law

Student". Jay and Bey agreed that he would take their eldest daughter, Azul, with him on the

tour. Bey, Rumi and Senor would join Jay and Azul on the tour in December in 2019 for the final

month of the tour.

After hearing the news of Jay's Pacifica tour, a close friend of Jay's, Banye East, thought that it

would be funny to play a practical joke on Bey. Banye decided that he would tell Bey that Jay

and Azul had been kidnapped and murdered by the notorious Kokonuti Gang. The Kokonuti

Gang was infamous in Pacifica, as they had been associated with the kidnapping and murder of

two famous Pacifica rappers: Tripac and No Biggie.

On 4 September 2021, Banye showed up to Bey and Jay's mansion and told Bey his concocted

story. Upon hearing Banye's story, Bey broke into tears and vomited uncontrollably before

fainting. Bey suffered from a nervous breakdown and had to be hospitalized for six weeks. She

is later diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. Due to Bey's illness, Jay has to cancel

the "Wish I was a USP Law Student" tour.

Jay and Bey wish to sue Banye for the harm that they have suffered. They have come to you

seeking legal advice.

Using the IRAC method and the extract of law provided below, advise your clients on

whether Banye East could be held liable for the harm caused.

The Law:

Torts are civil matters. Civil actions involve private individuals bringing actions/ claims/ lawsuits

against each other. According to Wikinson v Downton, a person is liable for causing psychiatric

harm to another person, if all of the following elements are proven.

1. The conduct of the Defendant is outrageous and extreme;

2. The Defendant intended to alarm or frighten the Plaintiff;

3. It is likely that the Plaintiff would have suffered harm as a result of the Defendant's

actions; and

4. The Plaintiff suffered from actual physical harm and a recognised psychiatric injury.

The High Court of Pacifica has discussed the tort of Wilkinson v Downton in Williams v Osaka

[2011] and held that:

"Actual physical harm" refers to physical injuries such as: physical ailments, severe

vomiting and weight loss; and

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a 'recognised psychiatric injury', mere distress,

anger or fright do not fall within this category.

Question 2

In class, we learned that there are a number of evidentiary rules that the Court must abide by.

Read the following scenario and answer the provided questions.

Luisa and Carding started dating when they were first year law students. It was a passionate,

physical relationship. After a few months of dating, Luisa resolved that she was unhappy with

the relationship and told Carding that she wanted to break up with him. Carding was extremely

unhappy with the news and punched the wall of his dormitory room. Luisa's friend, Jojo hears

them fighting and tells her friend, Totoy about the incident. That night, Carding and his friends

went out to Lawyer's Pub and drank copious amounts of spirits.

The next morning, Luisa was found unconscious in the bushes near the campus by a young

mother and her children. She was examined at the hospital by Dr. Mimi. The medical

examination found bruises on her arms and legs, trace amounts of semen in Luisa's vagina and

evidence of forced penetration.

Luisa's recollection of the event was noted by the investigating officer, Menang. Luisa had

received a text message at 2:17 AM from Carding asking her to meet him alone on the benches

in front of the campus. Luisa said that she went to see him and that she noticed that he was

very drunk. She stated that he begged her not to break up with him. When she refused, he

shouted, "You whore! You led me on this whole time! You slept with Diego!" Luisa stated that

when she attempted leave, Carding grabbed hold of her, dragged her to the bushes and

proceeded to rape her.

The police later pick up Carding and interview him under caution. They find a receipt from

Lawyer's Pub for five bottles of whisky in During the interview, he refuses to answer any of the

questions and demands a lawyer. The police officers leave him in the interrogation room for

twelve hours and do not give him and food or water. Carding later admits to raping Luisa and

says that he was drunk and overwhelmed by his emotions. Carding is charged with the offence

of rape.

It is later found that Carding was sued by another law student in 2019 for battery (a civil action

for unconsented touching.

1. Identify the different types of evidence in this scenario and discuss the probative value of

the evidence (in other words, what does the piece of evidence prove?).

2. Identify the evidentiary issues that you see in this scenario and explain why you think it

is an evidentiary issue.

3. Discuss whether the fact that Carding was found liable for battery can be used as

evidence in the current case.

4. Does the fact that Carding and Luisa had consensual sex on previous occasions

relevant?