Question 1 (20 marks) Bey Cartier was a well-known female musician who lived in Pacica. Bey was married to a rapper named Jay and had three children: Azul, Rumi and Senor. Jay was scheduled to start his four month Pacica tour on 2 September 2019 for his new album \"Wish I was a USP Law Student\". Jay would be taking his eldest daughter, Azul, with him on the tour. The plan was that Bey. Rumi and Senor would join Jay and Azul on the tour in December 2019 for the-final month of the tour. After hearing the news of Jay's Pacifica tour, a close friend of J ay'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 rappers. Tripac and No Biggie. On 4 September 2019. Banye showed up at Bey and Jay's house and told Bey his concocted story. Upon hearing Banye's story. Bey broke into tears and experienced severe vomiting. Her condition worsened as Bey suffered from a nervous breakdown and ended up being hospitalised for six weeks. Although 'she was discharged. she was diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). As a result of Bey's illness, Jay had to cancel his \"Wish I was a USP Law Student" Pacifica tout. Jay and Bey would like to sue Banye for causing the psychiatric harm that Bey has suffered. They have come seeking your advice. Using the IRAC method, advise your clients on whether Banye East could be held liable for causing psychiatric harm to Bey Cartier. Apply the law in the extract below: The Lavr This is a civil matter involving the tort of Wilkinson v Downton. According to Wilkinson 12 Downton, a person is liable for causing psychiatric harm to another person if it can be proven that: o The conduct of the Defendant is outrageous or extreme; a The Defendant intended to alarm or frighten the Plaintiff; It is likely that the Plaintiff would have suffered harm as a result of the Defendant's actions; 0 The Plaintiff suffered from \"actual physical harm\" and a \"recognised psychiatric injury\". The High Court of Pacifica has, in several precedent cases, held that: - \"Actual physical harm\" refers to physical injuries, such as: physical ailments, severe vomiting and weight loss; and o Post-traumatic stress disorder (PT SD) is a \"recognised psychiatric injury\". However, the High Court has held that \"mere distress, anger or flight" do not fall within this category. Question 2 (20 marks) Eric Prince was the only son of the Deputy Prime Minister of Pacica, Tupu Prince. The Princes were one of the wealthiest families in Pacifica because they owned PereniseEnterprises, the largest conglomerate in the Pacific regidn. Ariel Triton was a bright and ambitious young woman. As the daughter of a single mother, Ariel aspired to become a lawyer in the hopes of alleviating her family from poverty. After working hard, Ariel was awarded a scholarship to attend the Pacifica School of Law. Her mother, Athena, also worked 3 low income jobs to support her daughter's education. In January 2013, Ariel and Eric met at an \"Under the Sea" themed faculty social - and soon fell in love. In March 2018. Ariel found that she was four weeks pregnant. When she informed Eric that she was pregnant, he immediately broke up with her. As he left, he shouted \"If you think that this is the first time a girl has told me that she was pregnant to get money out of me, you're wrong! We're over you gold~digging slut!\" Although she was distraught, Ariel tried to continue with her law studies. Rumours spread around Pacifica Law School of how Eric Prince had dumped Ariel - causing most of the students to alienate her. Some suspected that she was pregnant but no one could confirm it as she was not showing (her baby bump could not be seen). Even though she tried her hardest, Ariel failed all of her courses in the first semester. By September 2018, Ariel's baby bump was beginning to show. Ariel was suffering from severe depression and anxiety. She had not told her mother that she was pregnant as she was afraid of being a disappointment. On 20 September 2018, Ariel approached a traditional healer, Fof' Fuesina, and asked if she could help abort her pregnancy. Abortion is a crime in Pacica. As a deeply religious woman, Fofo immediately sent Ariel away. Ariel was upset and broke Fofo's bone china vase. Fofo reported her to the police who took her away to the Saint James Mental Hospital, as she continued to scream uncontrollably. Dr Know diagnosed Ariel with depression and psychosis (a severe mental disorder in which thought and emotions are so impaired that contact is lost with external reality). Eric had a change of heart and realised that he had wronged Ariel and wanted to have the baby with her. When he called her on 21 September and told her of this, she cried and responded, \"It is too late. The baby is with Jesus. I sent the baby away\". On 22 September 2018, Chris, the cleaner, found a body of a deceased foetus in a toilet at the E wing of the St James Mental Hospital. There was also a camera on the wall immediately outside the said toilet which had recorded that Ariel walked into the toilet, where the foetus was found, at 3: 12am with red blood like stains on her white gown. The same camera recorded footage of Ariel walking out of the same toilet at 6:153m in a staggering manner. Tomu, the Manager of the hospital, gave the camera recording to the police. DNA result of the blood stained robe revealed that the said blood was Ariel's blood. Dr Gabby the pathologist concluded that the death was prenatal (before birth). On 1 October 2018, Ariel is charged under Section 113 of the Pacic-a Crimes Act 2009 which reads: 811' Female procuring her own miscarriage A woman or girl is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who wit}: * .1tent to procure miscarriage, whether she is with child or not: (a) Unlawfully administers to herself, or permit to be administered to her, any poison or any drug or any noxious thing; or (b) Unlawfully uses on herself or permits to be used on her, any instrument; or (c) Unlawfully uses on herself, or permits to be used on her, any other means whatsoever. At Ariel's trial, the High Court held that there was not enough evidence to prove that Ariel had procured he:~ own miscarriage. On 15 November 2018, Ariel was found not guilty of procuring her miscarriage by the High Court of Pacifica and was acquitted of the charge. a) Ariel's case has sparked outrage amongst the Pacifica community. Christianity is recognised in the Pacifica Constitution and many Pacificans are devout Christians. Due to public demand, the Public Prosecutor charges Ariel with another offence of \"Concealing the dead body of a child\" under $117 of the Pacier: Crimes Act 2018 based on the same series of events which carries a maximum sentence of 2 years. Ariel comes to your law rm seeking legal advice. i. In your own words, explain to Ariel what the law on aurrefois acquit (double jeopardy) is. Explain the circumstances in which this principle would apply. (5 marks) ii. Using IRAC, advise Ariel on whether the principle of autrefois acquit (double jeopardy) could be used as a defence in her case. Give reasons for your answer. Support your answer with relevant case law. (5 marks) b) Eric is enraged by Ariel's acquittal and tells his father, Tupu Prince, that Ariel had told him that she was pregnant with his child. He also mentioned his phone call with Ariel on 21 September 2019. Tupu contacts the Public Prosecutor and informs the Public Prosecutor of what Eric had told him. Tupu demands that the case against Ariel be re-opened on the basis of Eric's evidence. 1. Do you think that the prosecution will re-open the case based on Eric's evidence? Give reasons for your answer. (5 marks) c) Identify and discuss ve (5) evidentiary issues that might arise out of this scenario. (5 marks) Question 3 (20 marks) Choose any four (4) of the following questions to answer Some questions contain sub- questions. Each question is worth 5 marks. A. Draw a diagram of your home country's court structure. i. Clearly label each court. ii. Identify which courts are the: a) \"intermediary appellate court\"; and the b) \"higher appellate court\". iii. Write a short explanation (3-4 sentences) about each of the courts in the structure. (5 marks) B. How does the principle of res judicata work? Illustrate your answer with reference to case law ti. it was discussed during the semester. (5 marks) C. What is the doctrine of stare decisis? What is the rationale for applying the principle of stare decisis? Illustrate your answer using case law. (5 marks) D. Is goiter dicta generally considered to be binding? Could obirer dicta be relied upon as precedent? (5 marks) B. What does it mean to distinguish a case? If a Court distinguishes the current case from a previous decision, does this challenge the validity of the previous decision? Explain your answer: (5 marks) F. What is corroboration of evidence? Is it a legal requirement that all evidence submitted to the court should be corroborated? Why/Why not? Support your answer with reference to relevant case law