Footnoting case studies (1 Viewer)

[Rayanaldo]

I've just finished my Intro to Business Law essay.

But i'm just not sure on one thing. I have referred to a particular case and have footnoted it. At the bottom of the page, do you footnote:
1.) The name of the case AND where you got it from
OR
2.) Just the name of the case only
OR
3.) Where you got the from only.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Rayanaldo]

Ok thanks.

 

[Italian Hotshot]

Already finished? Nice work bud, I'm only 1/4 the way through.

I work better late at night and under pressure anyhow!

 

[debugz]

heheh yer, ive started it on thursday.. but then.. didnt do any over this long weekend! geezh... but thought of trying to do it now, and getting it out of the way... so i came here to procrastinate.

Edit* As an additional note - is anyone using headings in their essay. Ive never done this - and its tempting at times, and have yet not heard of headings NOT ALLOWED to be used. Has anyone brought this question up (and what did your tutor/lec say)... and/or is anyone using headings?

Looks like its still intro, body, conclusion for moi :S

 

[theone123]

headings are fine, optional.

 

[Jonathan A]

I've just finished my Intro to Business Law essay.

But i'm just not sure on one thing. I have referred to a particular case and have footnoted it. At the bottom of the page, do you footnote:
1.) The name of the case AND where you got it from
OR
2.) Just the name of the case only
OR
3.) Where you got the from only.

Thanks in advance.

It is a standard that of you refer to a case e.g:

Walker v State of New South Wales (1994) 126 ALR 321

...then you are implying you have looked at the entire case in its original form from the Australian Law Report (as in this case).

However being a first year, and to be honest, your cases may very well come from a textbook. So you would need to say:

Walker v State of New South Wales (1994) 126 ALR 321, cited in Terry and Guigni, Business, Society and the Law, Lawbook Co....

THIS IS IMPORTANT IN LAW: Because in law we have two types of sources, primary and secondary. Your textbook is secondary and in many cases it has no legal value in court.

 

[Jonathan A]

Edit* As an additional note - is anyone using headings in their essay. Ive never done this - and its tempting at times, and have yet not heard of headings NOT ALLOWED to be used. Has anyone brought this question up (and what did your tutor/lec say)... and/or is anyone using headings?

Looks like its still intro, body, conclusion for moi :S

Headings are usually recommended in a law essay. Some law subjects, you are marked on your headings as well as the content (because its the structure of you work).

To say the least, Lecturers LOVE headings. Double check on the standard, but I used them when I did my Business Law essays.

 

[Rayanaldo]

In my assignment, i've used the Tasmanian Dam Case as an example and i've put in the essay in italics Tasmanian Dam Case. Next to it is the number indicating the footnote.

Then, on the footnote, i have the full name of the case, which is THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA v. TASMANIA. THE TASMANIAN DAM CASE [1983] HCA 21; (1983) 158 CLR 1 (1 July 1983). I got it from the austlii site. Do i also have to put next to it where i got the case from (austlii site)?

 

[Rayanaldo]

Already finished? Nice work bud, I'm only 1/4 the way through.

I work better late at night and under pressure anyhow!

You do this subject at Blacktown right? If so, do you like our lecturer, Abdur Razzaque? I honestly can't stand him. And i got a lecture with him tomorrow morning at 8 bloody AM. Thank God thats the only thing i have on Tuesdays.

 

[debugz]

In my assignment, i've used the Tasmanian Dam Case as an example and i've put in the essay in italics Tasmanian Dam Case. Next to it is the number indicating the footnote.

Then, on the footnote, i have the full name of the case, which is THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA v. TASMANIA. THE TASMANIAN DAM CASE [1983] HCA 21; (1983) 158 CLR 1 (1 July 1983). I got it from the austlii site. Do i also have to put next to it where i got the case from (austlii site)?

hehehe i did the same... and layed it out exactly the same as you in the footnote, however i did not make reference to the austlii site. I did look it up there, and on other sites, but also throughout the book. .. but i dont belive its necessessary.

 

[Jonathan A]

In my assignment, i've used the Tasmanian Dam Case as an example and i've put in the essay in italics Tasmanian Dam Case. Next to it is the number indicating the footnote.

Then, on the footnote, i have the full name of the case, which is THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA v. TASMANIA. THE TASMANIAN DAM CASE [1983] HCA 21; (1983) 158 CLR 1 (1 July 1983). I got it from the austlii site. Do i also have to put next to it where i got the case from (austlii site)?

No. Austlii is an original source of law. By using "HCA 21" you are inferring that you have found the case on the internet and its on austlii. Note B: Do not put all citations in there, e.g. only use one: "[1983] HCA 21" OR "(1983) 158 CLR 1", the date is not needed.

As for the case name and footnoting, you write the case, then the year, volume number etc... go in the footnote.

 

[Jonathan A]

Note also that the case you referred to has a common name "Tasmanian Dams Case",. place this in brackets after the official title so something like The Commonwealth v Tasmania (Tasmanian Dams Case)

 

[Italian Hotshot]

You do this subject at Blacktown right? If so, do you like our lecturer, Abdur Razzaque? I honestly can't stand him. And i got a lecture with him tomorrow morning at 8 bloody AM. Thank God thats the only thing i have on Tuesdays.

Yeah I got him ... that is a toughie. He knows his info, but the English is a major problem.

I think that the Tuts are a major problem as well. People turn up to them with nothing prepared and don't even bother to look over the exercises we have been given. It is so awkard sitting there for an hour with a teacher trying to get a one sentence response for people. The only reason I went last week was because the web assignment was due!