Assessment Two – Case Study Assignment Help

Assessment Two – Case Study

Overview of this Assessment

Scenarios 1 & 2

Your task is to provide analysis and evaluation of the legal issues posed in the case study, drawing on the legal principles covered in Topics 3-4. Scenarios one and two are based on your course materials from Topics 3 to 4 (this does not necessarily mean that there is one question from each topic), however further research (beyond the textbook) will most definitely enhance the quality of your submission. If you wish to score a very high grade for this assessment, it is strongly advised that you incorporate research beyond the course materials.

Scenario 3

Scenario 3 requires you to analyse the effect of international legal instruments on commercial practises in Australia on the case study, derived from your own independent research. This scenario is completely research-based and requires you to

Citations & Referencing

You must correctly reference for this assessment, however, please do not reference PowerPoints, the study guide or the textbook. Cite cases and legislation (including international legal instruments and principles) in full – you need not cite the source of the case or legislation (for example if you research the facts from another textbook or article). Your answer to all the scenarios must be researched and referenced using the Deakin Harvard style of referencing. 2

Submission & Word Count

***YOU ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE LEGAL RESEARCH MODULE IN THE RESOURCES BEFORE THE DROPBOX FOR ASSESSMENT TWO WILL OPEN.***

The word count for this assessment is 1,500 words (including headings, sub-headings and intext citations, but DOES NOT INCLUDE references). There is a +/- 10% leeway. In other words, please ensure the maximum word count is 1,650 and you are not under 1,350. Submissions outside the word count leeway may be penalised.

Ensure that you read all of the instructions contained in this document.

Learning Outcomes

Scenario 1 Case Study – Hiro and the Federal Bank of Australia

Hiro is an employee of the Federal Bank of Australia (FBA) and works in the consumer lending division. FBA is currently running a competition with its consumer lenders with first prize being a $25,000.00 bonus at the end of the year. Hiro is very keen for the bonus and decides to speak to his grandmother and an ex-girlfriend of his about arranging loans to boost his sales figures.

Hiro hadn’t visited his grandmother recently and his parents hadn’t informed him about his grandmother developing Alzheimer’s disease. He calls his grandmother and has a short conversation with her about the terms and conditions of the loan, saying to her “I think I’d probably come and visit more if you put in a pool in your backyard. This loan will allow you to build one.” His grandmother mumbles back a reply about it being very lovely to hear from him and says that the weather has been very lovely recently. Hiro presses his grandmother for an answer on the loan and she replies, “Whatever you think is best.” Hiro skips the background check and proceeds with the loan, getting the documents signed the next day. Hiro wonders if he’s done the wrong thing but assures himself there is no problem as his grandmother, despite never going to school, was always very wise in his view.

Hiro then makes a call to his ex-girlfriend, Sally. Sally was very pleased to hear from Hiro as she had always loved him and longed to be together with him again. Hiro, knowing of Sally’s love for him, decides to exploit this love to ensure he gets another loan sale. Hiro says, “If you get this loan, you can buy a house and we can live together. I really want to be with you again, but I can’t see it working out unless you own a house.” Sally, desperate for Hiro’s love, quickly agrees to the loan. As Hiro feels a bit bad for Sally, he reduces the interest on the loan and feels much better about himself.

Advise Hiro on the enforceability of the above contracts.

Please use case law to support your answer.

Note: Research is required for this scenario. You may rely on the course materials to answer this question, but it is expected that you also research beyond the course materials. Please restrict your answers to the application of contract law (and, specifically, the content of Topics 3 & 4).

Suggested word count: 500-600 words.

(12 marks)

Scenario 2 Case Study – Akshita and Underground Solutions Pty Ltd

Akshita runs a construction company called Underground Solutions Pty Ltd (US) that specialises in tunneling.

Every employment contract at US contains the following clause:

“No employee can use the same skills employed at Underground Solutions Pty Ltd at any other firm operating in Australia for ten years after finishing a role at Underground Solutions Pty Ltd.”

Two of Akshita’s employees, Lin and Dimitri, decide to leave the company and hand in their notice. Akshita learns that Lin has accepted a new job at Grow Tall Pty Ltd (GT), a construction company that specializes in designing and building new parks and public spaces. Dimitri, meanwhile, has accepted an offer at Long Way Down Pty Ltd (LWD), a competing tunneling firm. US, GT, and LWD all operate across Australia and have local, state, and federal governments as their primary clients.

Akshita wishes to enforce the above clause against her former employees.

Akshita asks you for advice on whether she can enforce the above clause against her former employees. She also asks how she might structure similar clauses in the future to prevent them being challenged.

Please use case law to support your answer.

Note: Research is required for this scenario. You may rely on the course materials to answer this question, but it is expected that you also research beyond the course materials. Please restrict your answers to the application of contract law (and, specifically, the content of Topics 3 & 4).

Suggested word count: 500-600 words.

(12 marks)

Scenario 3 Case Study – Carmen

Carmen runs a business that buys wood from Spain, makes toys in Russia, then sells these to Australian companies for resale. Carmen runs her business from Russia.

One day, the company she purchases the wood from in Spain fails to make a delivery Carmen had paid for in advance. The very next day, despite making a shipment of toys to her largest Australian client, the company refuses to pay for the toys. Neither company provides a reason for their actions to Carmen.

Advise Carmen on the remedies available to her under the relevant international convention.

Note: All countries are treaty members of the relevant convention.

Please cite specific principles and related international conventions and articles in your advice.

Note: External research is required for this scenario. The course materials WILL NOT be sufficient in isolation to complete an answer for this scenario due to the International Law component, which is not taught formally. This particular question is designed to demonstrate ULO4 which requires students to recognise that international legal standards have a bearing on commercial practises in Australia.

Suggested word count: 200-300 words.

(6 marks)

Guidelines for Completing Assessment 2

The objective of this task is to provide you with another opportunity to formalise a written answer to a legal problem, albeit at a more advanced level, with an expectation of legal research. This assessment is the second step in acquiring the skill of legal argumentation, which is set as a discipline-specific skill with which to enhance your writing abilities, as well as to provide a deeper understanding of the workings of law for commerce. It is important that your discussion focuses on analysing the facts of the hypothetical problem and applying the law to those facts. Marks will be awarded:

• for your identification of the issues and the material facts that are relevant to those issues;
• your identification of the law (cases, legislation and legislative provisions, international law conventions and articles) that applies to those facts and issues; and
• most importantly, the application and analysis of the law as it applies to those facts and issues. Generalised statements of legal principles – that is, those that are not sufficiently relevant to the facts – will attract limited marks only;
• a conclusion, which is either certain, or dependant on the facts of the scenario, uncertain. In other words, if you are unable to conclude with certainty, please explain why.

There is a research component to this assessment (all scenarios require research beyond the course materials to excel, and scenario three is almost purely research based). You are expected to conduct your own research on the case study scenarios. There is no minimum or maximum number of resources that you must include, but all material must be correctly referenced according to the Deakin Harvard style of referencing. It is NOT about how many references you use, but rather the relevance and quality of those references that you select. It is once again emphasized that you need not reference the textbook, study guide, class lecture slides, or materials provided by your seminar tutor.

Referencing

For Assessment Two, you are required to provide a Reference List (using Deakin Harvard style of referencing) indicating the sources used.