# Eight small source cards · classify the source before the conclusion

**Print or project.** Cards A–F and H contain invented teaching situations, not local policy, enacted law or a real case. Cards G and cited institutional links identify authentic external sources; their summaries are original paraphrases. Do not ask learners to disclose real contact with police, courts or migration systems.

## Card A · One space, three kinds of rule

At **Banyan Learning Hub** (invented), the study-room sign says “one group per table”; a club asks members to leave phones in bags; a security volunteer claims “breaking either is a criminal offence”. No statute, regulation or valid by-law is supplied. A rule may be a school or club rule without being a crime. To establish legal force, identify the relevant jurisdiction, actual enacted instrument, conduct and authority. Ask: who made each rule, who enforces it and what evidence is missing before calling a breach a crime? [Q1](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md)

## Card B · An invented bill, not a law

In the fictional **Harbourlight State**, a member proposes the *Public Study Spaces Bill*. One model clause says “At public study sites, operators must give visitors a readable notice before closing a room.” A poster already claims “the Bill now makes an unannounced closure a crime”. Nothing says the bill passed, received assent, commenced, or created an offence. Put **proposal → scrutiny/debate → passage → assent → commencement** in order; mark every step that would need verification. Real Queensland has a single Legislative Assembly, not the federal two-house sequence. [QP1](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md)

## Card C · Three accounts of a mark on a wall

At fictional **Northbank Arts Hall**, a panel is marked after a festival. A caretaker saw a learner nearby; a time-stamped photograph shows an earlier mark but no person; a repair invoice shows a cost, not who caused it. The venue seeks a fair response while the learner denies making the mark. Neither account establishes an offence or guilt. List what each item can and cannot establish. In a criminal prosecution, the prosecution generally carries the burden and must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. A school conduct decision has a different procedure; do not transplant criminal proof rules automatically. [P1](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md) [Q1](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md)

## Card D · Which power are we sorting?

**Arm of Commonwealth government:** Parliament legislates, the executive administers, courts interpret/apply law and decide cases. Australian ministers sit in Parliament, so this is not a perfect personnel split. **Division between Commonwealth and states:** the Constitution allocates exclusive, concurrent and residual law-making powers; inconsistent Commonwealth law prevails to the extent stated by s 109. Those are two *different* comparisons. The fictional proposal in Card B is not automatically within any actual Australian parliament's jurisdiction. [P2](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md) [P3](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md)

## Card E · Courts are not interchangeable

For a simplified Queensland criminal path, the Magistrates Court is the first level; serious matters may be referred to the District Court or Supreme Court; the Supreme Court includes a Court of Appeal. Actual jurisdiction depends on legislation and the matter. A lower court should consider a binding decision from a higher court in its hierarchy on the same legal point; this is *precedent*, not a promise that every fact pattern has only one answer. **Broad procedure contrast:** in an adversarial model opposing parties lead presentation of their cases to a deciding judge; in an inquisitorial model the judicial officer takes a more active inquiry role. Real systems are not pure boxes. State what additional information would be needed before choosing a court for Card C. [QC1](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md) [A2](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md)

## Card F · A source ladder for a claim

Claim: “The Northbank mark is definitely a Queensland criminal offence.” Proposed sources: (1) a social post repeating a rumour; (2) a current, authorised Queensland statute with relevant provisions; (3) a judgment interpreting those provisions; (4) an invented classroom card. **Only 2 and potentially 3 can establish/interpret the actual legal rule**; none by itself proves the unknown facts or guilt in Card C. A statute is enacted law; common law arises through court decisions. The authorised [Queensland Criminal Code Act 1899](https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/inforce/current/act-1899-009) is an authentic example of a code, not evidence that this fictional scenario meets an offence. [L1](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md)

## Card G · Customary law source limits

The [Australian Law Reform Commission's 1986 report summary](https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/recognition-of-aboriginal-customary-laws-alrc-report-31/) describes Aboriginal customary laws as diverse and changing across peoples; its account says recognition within general Australian law was limited and uneven and that Aboriginal peoples must have authority in consultation. It is a **historic government report**, not a present-day First Nations person's voice or a rule from any named community. Compare two questions: “What legal recognition did the report discuss?” and “Who can speak for a particular living law today?” We cannot answer the second for a community using this card. [A1](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md)

## Card H · Interpret a fictional clause carefully

The fictional *Public Notice Act* says, “An operator must give visible notice before closing a public study room.” It has **no offence clause or penalty** in the supplied extract. In the teaching scenario a screen reader user asks for an audio notice. A purpose-based interpretation question asks what “visible notice” achieves and whether the supplied words address equal access; students should identify **uncertainty and alternative readings**, not declare a binding judgment. The authentic Queensland [Acts Interpretation Act 1954, s 14A](https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/inforce/current/act-1954-003) prefers the interpretation best achieving an Act's purpose and expressly does not create or extend criminal liability. We have not supplied a real purpose section, so the model's purpose cannot be proven. [L2](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md)

Original synthetic cards and source summaries © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).