Module LAW3165 for 2020/1
- Overview
- Aims and Learning Outcomes
- Module Content
- Indicative Reading List
- Assessment
Undergraduate Module Descriptor
LAW3165: Charity Law
This module descriptor refers to the 2020/1 academic year.
How this Module is Assessed
In the tables below, you will see reference to 'ILO's. An ILO is an Intended Learning Outcome - see Aims and Learning Outcomes for details of the ILOs for this module.
Formative Assessment
A formative assessment is designed to give you feedback on your understanding of the module content but it will not count towards your mark for the module.
| Form of assessment | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case comment | 2,000 words | 4-9 | Individual written feedback |
| Plan for (first) summative essay | 500 words | 1, 3-4, 6-9 | Individual written and/or oral feedback |
Summative Assessment
A summative assessment counts towards your mark for the module. The table below tells you what percentage of your mark will come from which type of assessment.
| Coursework | Written exams | Practical exams |
|---|---|---|
| 100 | 0 | 0 |
...and this table provides further details on the summative assessments for this module.
| Form of assessment | % of credit | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Either (i) Essay (40%) and Essay (60%) OR (ii) Essay (100%) | 100 | Essay (40%) 2,000 words and essay (60%) 3,000 words OR (ii) 5,000 words | 1-9 | Individual written feedback |
Re-assessment
Re-assessment takes place when the summative assessment has not been completed by the original deadline, and the student has been allowed to refer or defer it to a later date (this only happens following certain criteria and is always subject to exam board approval). For obvious reasons, re-assessments cannot be the same as the original assessment and so these alternatives are set. In cases where the form of assessment is the same, the content will nevertheless be different.
| Original form of assessment | Form of re-assessment | ILOs re-assessed | Timescale for re-assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Essay | Essay (for length, see notes below) | 1-9 | August/September reassessment period |
Re-assessment notes
The student may be assessed in the same form as the intended original assessment. Overall, the submitted summative assessments must satisfy either (i) or (ii) above, ie either two essays (one up to 2,000 words and worth 40%, the other up to 3,000 words and worth 60%) or one essay (up to 5,000 words and worth 100%). Due to eBART requirements, if option (i) is chosen, both essays must be submitted at the same time.
A 40% pass mark is required in respect of each essay submitted. So, for example, if a student submits an essay of 2,000 words, which is given 40% or more, but fails to submit a second essay or submits a second essay which fails to achieve 40%, re-assessment (by referral or deferral as appropriate) will be of a 3,000 word essay. Likewise, if a student submits an essay of 3,000 words, which is given 40% or more, but fails to submit a second essay or submits a second essay which fails to achieve 40%, re-assessment (by referral or deferral as appropriate) will be of a 2,000 word essay.
If a student submits a single essay of 5,000 words (option (ii)), which fails to achieve 40%, re-assessment (by referral or deferral as appropriate) may be either of a further 5,000 word essay or of two essays (option (i)), one of 2,000 words and one of 3,000 words.
Indicative Reading List
This reading list is indicative - i.e. it provides an idea of texts that may be useful to you on this module, but it is not considered to be a confirmed or compulsory reading list for this module.
Cases and decisions:
Aid/Watch Inc v Commissioner of Taxation [2010] HCA 42 (HCt Australia)
Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) v Charity Commission [2010] EWHC 520 (Ch)
Human Dignity Trust v Charity Commission (2014) FTT (Charity) No. CA/2013/0013
Re Greenpeace of New Zealand [2014] NZSC 105
Decision of the Charity Commission on an application for registration by the Temple of the Jedi Order, (December 2016)
Books and articles:
Chan, K - The Public-Private Nature of Charity Law (Hart Publishing, 2016)
Dunn, A – The Voluntary Sector, the State and the Law (Hart Publishing, 1998)
Harding, M – Charity Law and the Liberal State (CUP 2014)
McGregor-Lowndes, M and O’Halloran, K (eds) - Modernising Charity Law: recent developments and future directions (Edward Elgar Publishing. 2010)
McKenna, A – Applications to First-tier Tribunal (Charity) by Persons Affected (2012-13) 16 CL&PR 147
Parachin, A – Charity, politics and neutrality (2015-16) 18 CL&PR 23
Picarda, H – Thornton v Howe: A sound principle or a seminal case past its best buy date? (2013-14) 16 CL&PR 85
Synge, M – The ‘new’ public benefit requirement: making sense of charity law? (Hart Publishing, 2015)
Walton, C – McGovern v AG: constraints on judicial assessment of charitable benefit (2014) Conv 317
