Hertfordshire Law School

Coursework Assessments

Level 7

2020-21

1
Contents

How to Submit. .......................................................................................................................3

1.1. Presentation.................................................................................................................3
1.2. Page Limit.....................................................................................................................3
1.3. Late Submission..........................................................................................................3
1.4. Referencing..................................................................................................................4
1.5. Extensions....................................................................................................................5
1.6. Serious Adverse Circumstances..............................................................................5
Results and Feedback ............................................................................................................5
Academic Misconduct. ..........................................................................................................7
Grading Criteria.........................................................................................................................8
OSCOLA Quick Reference Guide..........................................................................………11

2
How to submit:

Written Coursework:

Ensure that you consult the Assessment Details section on your Module for details on individual
assessments.

Presentation

The assignment itself must be submitted as a Word document in Arial font size 11 and in double
line spacing.

Your name must not appear on your assignment. All assessed coursework is blind marked using your
student registration number on your ID card. Your student registration number and module name should
appear on every page of your essay and each page should be numbered. This is best achieved by use of
the header and footer tool. You are also required to put your student registration number and module title
in the file name of your assignment when submitting on Canvas (e.g. Banking Law 14043489.doc).

[NB Coronavirus Update: If you do not have access to a computer in order to type your work, you can
handwrite your assessments and take a photo/scan from your phone, which you can then upload to
Canvas. If you are not able to upload the images yourself, please contact lawadmin@herts.ac.uk so that
we can help with converting your images to a file.]

Work Length

Your assessment has a maximum word limit. Do not exceed the word limit in relation to your answer by
more than 10%. Your word count must appear at the end of your work.

Word limits will be strictly applied as you are being assessed on your ability to produce an answer within
a proscribed format. Do not exceed the word limit in relation to your answer. Markers will not mark any
work that appears beyond the prescribed word count and you will not be given any credit for the
additional work.

The word count for coursework will NOT include footnotes or the bibliography. However, footnotes must
not be used as a means of circumventing the word count by including material that should be in the body
of the answer.

Late Submission of Coursework

Submission deadlines are not flexible. Students should submit their work well in advance of the deadline
(ideally several hours) to be sure of a reliable internet connection and sufficient upload time. Work
submitted at any point (including seconds) after the deadline is recorded as a late submission on Canvas
and will be capped.

All students must note that failure to submit coursework by the dates and time specified has SERIOUS
CONSEQUENCES. The penalties for late submission of coursework are as follows:

Unless there are accepted Serious Adverse Circumstances (SAC) or an extension has been given:

3
 1. For each day or part thereof (or for hard copy submission only, working day or part
thereof) for up to five days after the published deadline, coursework relating to modules at
Level 7 submitted late (including deferred coursework, but with the exception of referred
coursework), will have the numeric grade reduced by 10 grade points until or unless the
numeric grade reaches or is 50. Where the numeric grade awarded for the assessment is
less than 50, no lateness penalty will be applied;

2. Referred coursework submitted after the published deadline will be awarded a grade of
zero (0).

3. Coursework (including deferred coursework) submitted later than five days (five working
days in the case of hard copy submission) after the published deadline will be awarded a
grade of zero (0).

(Note for guidance:

For assessments requiring hard copy submission, working day refers to a weekday when the
University is open for business, including vacation times)

Referencing

All quotations from or use of other writers’ work must be properly referenced – that is, you must give the
author, title, and date of publication of the work concerned, and the page or section number of the
passage quoted or cited. Reference style should remain consistent throughout each submitted
assignment.

All your assignments should be properly referenced using the OSCOLA Referencing System.

You should include a full bibliography at the end of your work.

Resources

You should make good use of library resources as part of your research to find relevant cases, legislation
and authoritative commentary such as monographs and journal articles.

Many of these will be available in the academic and legal databases such as LexisLibrary and Westlaw,
but you will also find print and ebooks in Library Search

Link to Legal resources page – https://www.studynet2.herts.ac.uk/ptl/common/LIS.nsf/lis/law

For guidance in using resources please contact the Information Manager for Law and Criminology – Jane
Bilson j.bilson@herts.ac.uk

Turnitin

All written assessments within the School will offer students the opportunity to use Turnitin formatively.
This formative Turnitin submission will be limited to one attempt per assignment in line with the University
policy which seeks to support the development of students’ academic writing skills and to promote good
academic practice.

4
Turnitin may also be used on individual pieces of work in which plagiarism is suspected, taking account of
the level of study, the level of writing maturity expected of the student and the nature of the assignment
task.

Extensions

Extensions should be requested BY 11AM ON THE DAY OF SUBMISSION. Please follow the
instructions at the link below:

https://herts.instructure.com/courses/70457/pages/applying-for-extensions-on-
assignments?module_item_id=915722

Serious Adverse Circumstances

Serious Adverse Circumstances are significant circumstances beyond a student’s control that would have
affected your ability to perform to your full potential if you were to sit or submit an assessment at the
appointed time. As a general rule, if a student has a valid claim for serious adverse circumstances then
they should not sit the affected examination(s) or submit the affected coursework(s). If the Board of
Examiners accepts your claim, you will be offered a deferred assessment.

If you sit/submit an assessment, by doing so you are stating that you are fit and well to do so. Therefore,
you will not be able to claim later that Serious Adverse Circumstances have affected your
work/performance.

The serious adverse circumstances form and guidance are available through Ask Herts and on the
Exams Office page on Canvas. You can also find the SAC form on the LLM Programme site within
Programme Information at link below:

https://herts.instructure.com/courses/70457/pages/submitting-serious-and-adverse-circumstances-for-
assignments?module_item_id=1455792

[NB – Coronavirus Update: Serious Adverse Circumstances – Due to the outbreak of coronavirus the
limited grounds on which students may submit serious adverse circumstances have been suspended
from the start of Semester B, 20th January 2020, until further notice. If you have circumstances which
mean you are unable to complete or submit assessments on time or to the best of your ability, please
explain in Section C of the form. There is no need to obtain evidence - you can self-certify].

What happens when I submit an assessment?

 All work is blind marked.

 All work is marked against grading criteria.

 Each element of assessment has a marking scheme attached to it to ensure that teams which
have more than one marker are marking against objectively determined principles.

5
  Once marked, a sample of the assignments will be internally moderated by at least one other
tutor, who has not normally first-marked the work, to ensure that there is consistency in both the
mark and the feedback given by all markers.

 The module external examiner will moderate the assessment in advance of the Module Board.

 In some cases (such as a dissertation), work is double-blind marked meaning that assignments
are marked independently by two markers and a final mark is agreed.

 Your marked assignment and mark will be returned within four calendar weeks. If there is a delay
to this (for example due to marker illness), you will be notified in advance by the Associate Dean
of School (Academic Quality Assurance).

 All marks are provisional and await confirmation by the relevant Board of Examiners.

If you have any queries about your marked work following its return, please arrange an appointment to
speak with the marker in the first instance.

6
 Academic Misconduct

 Specific detail relating to academic offences is located in UPRs AS13 and AS14.

 Assessment (by examination or coursework) can be stressful but it is part of everyday life for
students and most people manage it well. There are a small number who seek to gain an unfair
advantage over their fellow students by acts of academic misconduct.

 Academic misconduct comes in various forms but the most common are plagiarism (i.e.
presenting another person’s work as your own), falsification of data, collusion and cheating.

 Plagiarism is presenting another person’s work as your own work (whether intentionally or
unintentionally) without acknowledgement of the source. Plagiarism includes copying or
paraphrasing work from any published or unpublished source (whether textbook, journal,
newspaper, the internet or other electronic media, lecture slides, hand-outs, or a fellow student’s
work) and presenting this for assessment without full acknowledgement of the source. Plagiarism
will occur if you:

- Word for word copy from sources (copy & paste);

- Use quotes without the use of quotation marks;
- Copy a sentence or paragraph into your assignment and change a few words or phrases
(word switch);

 Collusion will occur if you work with or assist another student when you are expected to work
independently;

 The University takes a very dim view of such activity and the penalties can be severe. The best
advice is not to do it in the first place. If you are finding a module difficult then speak to one of the
teaching staff.

 Any finding of misconduct can be recorded on your student record and this can be reported to
any professional bodies or in an academic reference.

NB: PLEASE ENSURE YOU HAVE VIEWED VIDEO/QUIZ IN LINK BELOW PRIOR TO SUBMISSION
OF YOUR COURSEWORK:

Academic Conduct Offences Explained

7
 Grading Criteria
Expectations of written assessments at Level 7:

Presentation & structure
Includes:
Structure work to review the
key issues and/or writers in
the areas
Relate this review to the
arguments underlying the
question
Combine elements in
different patterns in a
structure which follows
development of the
argument
Use of legal and academic
language to best effect
Present work in an
academic format with
extensive use of footnotes
and well designed
formatting
Content / Knowledge
Includes:
Properly identify all legal or
other relevant issues raised
by the question
Attach appropriate
emphasis to each issue
depending upon its
significance in the
discussion
State the law or other
sources accurately and in
appropriate detail
Provide a confident
evaluation of potentially
complex or contradictory
issues towards a well
reasoned and supported
conclusion
Breadth / Depth & Analysis, Synthesis & Presentation of
Integration of Sources Evaluation References
Includes: Includes:
Includes:
Analysis:
Demonstrate an Use your material to Use a full range of footnotes
extensive use of primary demonstrate your to cite your references from
sources and secondary understanding of the a wide range of reading
sources without over- significance of the
reliance on secondary different issues in the Ensure an accurate
texts question approach to referencing
using the full range of
Aim for a sharply focused Synthesis: resources available within
evaluation of the issues Bring together the the recommended system
raised by the question competing arguments
within the question, Include all references in your
Integrate supporting providing an overall bibliography
material very concisely viewpoint in your
and relevantly into your conclusion Use the OSCOLA
argument referencing system –
Evaluation: information available on
Assess the validity of Studynet under Learning
competing arguments, Resources and the Law
reflect and come to Subject Toolkit
conclusions on the
validity of different
interpretations or
approaches

Key tips: Key tips: Key tips: Key tips: Key tip:

Ensure your work appears
as well presented as
possible by comparison with
journal articles or other
equivalent material you
have researched
Spell check your work and
check for grammar and
sentence construction
Ensure your spell checker is
set to English UK
Write in clear English and
avoid informal language
Avoid using personal
pronouns, e.g. I, We, My.
Aim for a balance of
appropriate detail
highlighting the issues from
your sources depending on
the significance of the issue
to the answer
Aim for both synthesis and
evaluation in your answer
highlighting and identify any
possible approaches to
apparently irresolvable
issues
For a higher mark you will Review the instruction in Avoid plagiarism
need to show evidence of the Question – synthesis
extensive reading in and evaluation are likely Ensure you use the
primary sources to be the main focus maximum detail of the
referencing system,
Research as widely as Ensure you address your including references quoted
possible to find relevant answer to these aspects in other sources you have
material to support your used
answer outside of those In a problem question
supplied to you through scenario, you need to
the module analyse and then bring
together the competing
arguments for and
against the party you are
asked to advise by
synthesis and evaluation
in a comprehensive and
detailed conclusion

Avoid inappropriate
abbreviations, e.g. Can’t,
doesn’t, they’re.

[The following are guidelines for understanding the marking criteria. They are not definitive. They are
intended to clarify the kinds of qualities or failings which examiners look for in the assessment of written
work, whatever form it takes, and to provide some indication as to how those relate to the grading
process. The examiner will have greater expectations of a student studying at Level 7 and this will be
reflected in the precise marking criteria adopted for specific assessments. These guidelines provide some
indication of the differentiation between the levels of study. At postgraduate level, students are expected
to discuss issues of law in a critical and contextual way. Descriptions of the law will earn no more than a
bare pass mark.]

8
 Interpretation of Grade Written Work Level 7 Grading Criteria

Indicative Numeric Grade Grade Presentation & Content / Breadth / Depth & Analysis, Presentation of
Classification Grade Point Descriptor structure Knowledge Integration of Synthesis & References
Descriptor (19 point Sources Evaluation
scale)
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding level of Outstanding standard
presentation & clarity. exploration of topic breadth & depth of Analysis, Synthesis of referencing within
No significant showing excellent sources used, & Evaluation. text with accuracy to
grammatical / spelling knowledge & showing student Highly developed / those on list.
errors. Work reads understanding. All has read widely on focused work which Accurate list & use of
fluently with clear, relevant points have the topic. has fully engaged recommended
appropriate structure. been identified and Outstanding with the question referencing system in
95 Outstanding student may have integration of and has presented footnotes and
shown awareness of appropriate a convincing, well- bibliography, as well
the wider issues authoritative supported as in the main body of
around the topic. sources into work – argument. the work.
4.5 student has fully
engaged with the
sources in building
an argument/case.

Distinction Excellent structure. Excellent level of Excellent breadth & Excellent level of Excellent standard of
Fluent writing style knowledge & depth. Evaluation, Analysis referencing within text
with very few errors. demonstrated. Covers Excellent & Synthesis. with accuracy to those
all relevant points & integration of on list.
85 Excellent issues. appropriate sources Accurate list & use of
into work to help recommended
develop an referencing system.
argument.

Very good clear Very good level of Very good breadth Very good level of Very good standard of
structure. knowledge & & depth appropriate Evaluation, Analysis referencing within text
77 4.25 Articulate & fluent understanding to topic, some & Synthesis but not with general accuracy
writing style. Very few demonstrated. Key evidence of wider consistently taken to those on list.
Very good grammatical errors & points are identified reading. to full extent. Use of recommended
spelling mistakes. but some minor Sources integrated referencing system.
issues may not be very well to provide
72 4.00 fully explored or supporting
applied evidence.

Good clear Good level of Key sources are Good level of Consistent standard of
68 3.75 presentation & knowledge & identified but limited Evaluation, Analysis referencing within text
structure with understanding evidence of wider & Synthesis but but may not have fully
paragraphing. demonstrated. Most reading. some issues could complied with the
Writing is mainly clear major issues explored Sources may not be be addressed or recommended
Commendation 65 3.50 Good but some spelling &/ with some minor fully integrated into developed further. referencing system.
or grammatical errors. aspects not the work or may not Some minor
considered always be the most omissions.
authoritative Style may be a little
62 3.25 sources. more descriptive.

9
 Reasonable structure. Reasonable level of Reasonable Reasonable level of Reasonable use of
58 3.00 Generally written knowledge & breadth & depth Evaluation, Analysis appropriate
clearly but there may understanding but appropriate to topic. & Synthesis but referencing within text
Pass be occasional with incomplete Some additional tends towards the & in the bibliography.
55 2.75 Clear Pass grammatical & / or integration into topic sources will be descriptive and a Some inaccuracies in
spelling errors. set. A few major mentioned but too few matters recording.
issues not fully much reliance on superficially
52 2.50 explored and minor key cases or addressed or
issues omitted. textbook. omitted

A basic structure. Basic level of Basic breadth & Basic level of Basic referencing
48 2.25 Not always written knowledge & depth appropriate to Evaluation, analysis within text & broadly
clearly & has understanding but topic. & synthesis, with a consistent use of
Not applicable grammatical & / or with limited integration Some sources will number of matters referencing system.
45 2.00 Marginal Fail spelling errors. into topic set. Some be mentioned but superficially Some inaccuracies in
major issues not fully too much reliance addressed or recording.
explored and minor on key cases or omitted.
42 1.75 issues omitted. textbook.

Weak format, limited Unsatisfactory Limited or muddled Limited evidence of Use of referencing
38 1.00 or poor structure. evidence of understanding of evaluation, analysis system with errors &
Muddled work with knowledge & the topic with & synthesis. inconsistently applied.
many spelling & / or understanding with limited reference to More development Limited referencing
35 0.75 grammatical errors. limited exploration or relevant sources & comment needed. within the text. Limited
omission of the major with some irrelevant Answer generally accuracy of in-text
issues to topic. limited to accurate references compared
32 0.50 description. to those in the final
Clear Fail Reference list.
Inadequate format & Inadequate evidence Very limited Inadequate. Inadequate
poor paragraphing / of knowledge & understanding of Very limited Inaccurate use of
signposting. understanding with topic with very evidence of referencing system or
Not applicable 25 0.25 Inappropriate writing very limited limited reference to evaluation, analysis absence of use of
style exploration or relevant sources or synthesis. system.
Poorly written &/or omission of the major and possible Answer generally
poor spelling & issues. reference to limited to
grammar. irrelevant sources description, some of
which is inaccurate.
Little or Nothing of merit. Nothing of merit. Nothing of merit Nothing of merit. Nothing of merit
Nothing of Poorly written work, No evidence of No breadth or depth No evidence of Referencing system
merit lacking structure, appropriate to answer nor evaluation, analysis was not or very poorly
paragraphing / knowledge & reference to or synthesis. used.
10 0.00 signposting. understanding. relevant sources. Question has not
Many inaccuracies in been answered.
spelling & grammar.

10
OSCOLA Quick Reference Guide

Primary Sources

Do not use full stops in abbreviations. Separate citations with a semi-colon.

Cases

Give the party names, followed by the neutral citation, followed by the Law Reports citation (eg AC, Ch,
QB). If there is no neutral citation, give the Law Reports citation followed by the court in brackets. If the
case is not reported in the Law Reports, cite the All ER or the WLR, or failing that a specialist report.

Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd [2008] UKHL 13, [2008] 1 AC 884

R (Roberts) v Parole Board [2004] EWCA Civ 1031, [2005] QB 410

Page v Smith [1996] AC 155 (HL)

When pinpointing, give paragraph numbers in square brackets at the end of the citation. If the judgment
has no paragraph numbers, provide the page number pinpoint after the court.

Callery v Gray [2001] EWCA Civ 1117, [2001] 1 WLR 2112 [42], [45]

Bunt v Tilley [2006] EWHC 407 (QB), [2006] 3 All ER 336 [1]–[37]

R v Leeds County Court, ex p Morris [1990] QB 523 (QB) 530–31

If citing a particular judge:

Arscott v The Coal Authority [2004] EWCA Civ 892, [2005] Env LR 6 [27] (Laws LJ)

Statutes and statutory instruments

Act of Supremacy 1558

Human Rights Act 1998, s 15(1)(b)

Penalties for Disorderly Behaviour (Amendment of Minimum Age) Order 2004, SI 2004/3166

EU legislation and cases

Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union [2008] OJ C115/13

Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (EC Merger
Regulation) [2004] OJ L24/1, art 5

Case C–176/03 Commission v Council [2005] ECR I–7879, paras 47–48

European Court of Human Rights

Omojudi v UK (2009) 51 EHRR 10

Osman v UK ECHR 1998–VIII 3124

Balogh v Hungary App no 47940/99 (ECHR, 20 July 2004)

11
Simpson v UK (1989) 64 DR 188

Secondary Sources

Books

Give the author’s name in the same form as in the publication, except in bibliographies, where you should
give only the surname followed by the initial(s). Give relevant information about editions, translators and
so forth before the publisher, and give page numbers at the end of the citation, after the brackets.

Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (first published 1651, Penguin 1985) 268

Gareth Jones, Goff and Jones: The Law of Restitution (1st supp, 7th edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2009)

K Zweigert and H Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law (Tony Weir tr, 3rd edn, OUP 1998)

Contributions to edited books

Francis Rose, ‘The Evolution of the Species’ in Andrew Burrows and Alan Rodger (eds), Mapping the
Law: Essays in Memory of Peter Birks (OUP 2006)

Encyclopedias

Halsbury’s Laws (5th edn, 2010) vol 57, para 53

Journal articles

Paul Craig, ‘Theory, “Pure Theory” and Values in Public Law’ [2005] PL 440

When pinpointing, put a comma between the first page of the article and the page pinpoint.

JAG Griffith, ‘The Common Law and the Political Constitution’ (2001) 117 LQR 42, 64

Online journals

Graham Greenleaf, ‘The Global Development of Free Access to Legal Information’ (2010) 1(1) EJLT <
http://ejlt.org//article/view/17 > accessed 27 July 2010

Command papers and Law Commission reports

Department for International Development, Eliminating World Poverty: Building our Common Future
(White Paper, Cm 7656, 2009) ch 5

Law Commission, Reforming Bribery (Law Com No 313, 2008) paras 3.12–3.17

Websites and blogs

Sarah Cole, ‘Virtual Friend Fires Employee’ (Naked Law, 1 May 2009)
<www.nakedlaw.com/2009/05/index.html> accessed 19 November 2009

Newspaper articles

Jane Croft, ‘Supreme Court Warns on Quality’ Financial Times (London, 1 July 2010) 3

12