Ave judicial decisions since 1945 sharpened or blurred the distinction between a lease and a licence?

Upper-second Class (60-69)

An upper-second class answer is written in lucid English, with a logical and coherent structure. It provides a detailed but not entirely comprehensive discussion of most of the major issues involved and most of the minor ones. All relevant issues are identified and discussed, and irrelevant issues are ignored or discarded. For each issue it synthesises the relevant legal arguments, supports them with accurate citation of statute and case law authority and analyses the strengths and weaknesses of different arguments. The citation of authority will not be as extensive as that expected of a first class answer.

In the case of problem questions, the citation and critique of legal authorities in relation to the issues raised by the hypothetical facts will in accuracy and scope reflect the quality to be found in a first class answer, but will miss some of the nuances or more subtle points implied by the question. There may be some reference to others (reform bodies, academic writing), but this will not be fully integrated into the answer. The level of analysis and distinguishing of authority will be less sophisticated than for a first class answer.

Where appropriate, the answer describes the social, philosophical, political or economic context of the legal principles, indicates an awareness of proposals for reform or impending change to the law, and shows evidence of wide ranging research. The research will be more limited than that displayed in a 1st class answer. There are no major misstatements of law in the answer and few minor ones. Thus the criteria for a 2.1 are basically the same as for a 1st, but at a lower standard. To gain a 2.1 it is, however, vital that the answer makes a conscientious attempt to address the issues raised by the question. An answer which is merely descriptive about the broad area covered by the question, with little or no reference made to, or analysis of, the issues raised by it is unlikely to get a 2.1 mark, however accurate the description might otherwise be.
footnotes and bibliography