Recent Question/Assignment
HI6027: BUSINESS AND CORPORATIONS LAW
Trimester 2 2016 - Group Assignment
Instructions:
1. Form a group of between three and five students.
2. Select a case from one of the cases below.
3. Advise your lecturer by email of your group members and case selected. PLEASE NOTE: Lecturer approval is required. You must NOT start on your assignment until your lecturer approves your group and case. No approval = Fail.
4. Select the party you wish to represent ie. Plaintiff or Defendant; or ASIC or Defendant.
5. Research your selected case on Austlii.
6. Read and understand your selected case.
7. Prepare and present a summary of the case and your selected party’s arguments.
8. All members MUST present.
9. Total marks for this assignment is 20 marks, and total weight for this assignment is 20%.
10. Time limit is 5 – 10 minutes per group.
2
BUSINESS LAW CASES
1. Nagel v Rottnest Island Authority (1993)
2. Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre v Anzil (2000)
3. Roads and Traffic Authority v Dederer (2007)
4. Esanda Finance v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997)
5. Fallas v Mourlas (2006)
6. Rogers v Whitaker (1992)
7. Caltex Oil v Dredge (1976)
8. Perre v Apand (1999)
9. L Shaddock v Parramatta City Council (1982)
10. Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980)
11. Hawkins v Clayton (1988)
12. Koehler v Cerebos (Aust) Ltd (2005)
13. Horne v Queensland (1995)
14. Peter Joseph Haylen v NSW Rugby Union Ltd (2002)
15. Flavel v State of SA (2008)
16. Tame v NSW (2001)
17. Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Ltd (2001)
18. Hackshaw v Shaw (1984)
19. Baker v Gilbert (2003)
20. Australian Safeway Stores v Zaluzna (1987)
CORPORATIONS LAW CASES
1. Forrest v ASIC (2014)
2. ASIC v Citigroup (2007)
3. ASIC v Soust (2010)
4. North v Marra Developments Ltd (1981)
5. Fame Decorator Agencies Pty Ltd v Jeffries Industries Ltd (1998)
6. Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995)
7. Northside Developments Pty Ltd v Registrar-General (1990)
8. Permanent Trustee Aus. Ltd (as Trustee of Advance Property Fund) v Stout & Others (1999)
9. Nassar v Innovative Precasters Group Pty Ltd (2009)
10. McGellin v Mount King Mining NL (1998)
11. Beck v Weinstock (2013)
12. Kinsela v Russell Kinsela Pty Ltd (in liq) (1986)
13. ASIC v Hellicar (2012)
14. ASIC v Lindberg (2012)
15. Shafron v ASIC (2012)
16. ASIC v Healey (2011)
17. Vines v ASIC (2006)
18. ASIC v Adler (2002)
19. Brunninghausen v Glavanics (1999)
20. ASIC v Rich (2003
Trimester 2 2016 - Group Assignment
Instructions:
1. Form a group of between three and five students.
2. Select a case from one of the cases below.
3. Advise your lecturer by email of your group members and case selected. PLEASE NOTE: Lecturer approval is required. You must NOT start on your assignment until your lecturer approves your group and case. No approval = Fail.
4. Select the party you wish to represent ie. Plaintiff or Defendant; or ASIC or Defendant.
5. Research your selected case on Austlii.
6. Read and understand your selected case.
7. Prepare and present a summary of the case and your selected party’s arguments.
8. All members MUST present.
9. Total marks for this assignment is 20 marks, and total weight for this assignment is 20%.
10. Time limit is 5 – 10 minutes per group.
2
BUSINESS LAW CASES
1. Nagel v Rottnest Island Authority (1993)
2. Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre v Anzil (2000)
3. Roads and Traffic Authority v Dederer (2007)
4. Esanda Finance v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997)
5. Fallas v Mourlas (2006)
6. Rogers v Whitaker (1992)
7. Caltex Oil v Dredge (1976)
8. Perre v Apand (1999)
9. L Shaddock v Parramatta City Council (1982)
10. Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980)
11. Hawkins v Clayton (1988)
12. Koehler v Cerebos (Aust) Ltd (2005)
13. Horne v Queensland (1995)
14. Peter Joseph Haylen v NSW Rugby Union Ltd (2002)
15. Flavel v State of SA (2008)
16. Tame v NSW (2001)
17. Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Ltd (2001)
18. Hackshaw v Shaw (1984)
19. Baker v Gilbert (2003)
20. Australian Safeway Stores v Zaluzna (1987)
CORPORATIONS LAW CASES
1. Forrest v ASIC (2014)
2. ASIC v Citigroup (2007)
3. ASIC v Soust (2010)
4. North v Marra Developments Ltd (1981)
5. Fame Decorator Agencies Pty Ltd v Jeffries Industries Ltd (1998)
6. Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995)
7. Northside Developments Pty Ltd v Registrar-General (1990)
8. Permanent Trustee Aus. Ltd (as Trustee of Advance Property Fund) v Stout & Others (1999)
9. Nassar v Innovative Precasters Group Pty Ltd (2009)
10. McGellin v Mount King Mining NL (1998)
11. Beck v Weinstock (2013)
12. Kinsela v Russell Kinsela Pty Ltd (in liq) (1986)
13. ASIC v Hellicar (2012)
14. ASIC v Lindberg (2012)
15. Shafron v ASIC (2012)
16. ASIC v Healey (2011)
17. Vines v ASIC (2006)
18. ASIC v Adler (2002)
19. Brunninghausen v Glavanics (1999)
20. ASIC v Rich (2003
Looking for answers ?
Recent Questions
Assessment 2: (20%) Case Study Presentation Due Date weeks 10This assessment builds on your theoretical knowledge and tests your ability to apply this knowledge to practice.you are required to formulate...Assessment 2Assessment 2Report: 30%Word count: 1400 – 1600 wordsDue date: Sunday of Week 8DescriptionYou are playing the role of a community service worker supporting a young adult son who is 18 years...1500-1800 wordsInstructions From TutorPlease download the eTask3 spreadsheet from Canvas and save the eTask spread as an Excel file. The main content of the force method is taught in Lectures 6,7&8.eTask3.1 is a...ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONSAssessment Practical assessmentAssessment code: 011Academic Year: 2023/2024Trimester: 2Module Title: Critical Perspectives on Cross-Border BusinessModule Code: MOD009194Level: 6Module...Information Systems Analysis & DesignAssignmentDue date: Week 5 Friday (5 Apr 2024) 11:59 pm AESTWeighting: 30%Length: 1,200 to 1,500 words (penalty will apply if the length is outside this limit)Assessment...Problem:University of Technology Sydney 48353: CONCRETE DESIGN Autumn 2024 - Assignment 2 (13 Marks)The figure illustrates the cross-section of a reinforced concrete column with a hexagonal shape (equal...Show All Questions