(20% - max word 3000 Due Date Week 10)
Submit three answer from the tutorial questions discussed each week after each the lecture.
Identify the issues of the prob-lem 20
Explain the relevant law relating to the problem 20
Discuss the potential legal ar-guments relating to the problem 20
Summarise a balanced conclu-sion to the issues of the problem 20
Criteria High Distinction
80% - Distinction
70%- 79% Credit
presentation At all times, the workbook was clearly structured, logical, and un-derstandable with references. At all times,
the workbook was clearly struc-tured, logical, and understand-able. Most of the time,
the workbook was clearly struc-tured, logical, and understand-able. Some of the time,
the workbook was clearly structured, log-ical, and under-standable. At no times was the workbook clearly struc-tured, logical, and understand-able.
Identify the issues of the problem All of the issues are clearly and accurately de-tailed with refer-ence to cases with similar facts. All of the issues are clearly and accurately de-tailed. All of the issues are clearly and accurately sum-marised. Some of the issues are clear-ly and accurate-ly outlined in brief. The issues are not clearly or ac-curately outlined.
Explain the relevant law relating to the problem All of the relevant law is clearly and accurately de-tailed, and the Act and related cases are dis-cussed. All of the rele-vant law is clear-ly and accurately detailed. Most of the rele-vant law is clear-ly and accurately summarised. Some of the relevant law is clearly and ac-curately out-lined in brief. The relevant law is not clearly or accurately out-lined.
Discuss the potential le-gal argu-ments relat-ing to the problem All the legal ar-guments are clear-ly and accurately detailed, and there is a synthesis with the relevant law. All the legal ar-guments are clearly and accu-rately detailed. Most of legal arguments are clearly and accu-rately summa-rised. Some of the legal arguments are clearly and accurately out-lined in brief. The legal argu-ments are not clearly or accu-rately outlined.
Summarise a balanced conclusion to the issues of the problem A balanced deci-sion is accurately detailed with ref-erence to alterna-tive outcomes. A balanced deci-sion is accurately detailed. A balanced deci-sion is accurately summarised in summary format. A balanced de-cision is accu-rately outlined in brief. A balanced deci-sion is not dis-cussed.
Question 8.5 from the text:
Booth, a merchant banker, paid his friend Hains, a director of several Australian listed companies, $18,000 for “inside information” which he intended to use in determining how to invest his client’s funds. Insider trading is a criminal offence pursuant to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 100G. Hains has since failed to provide any information to Booth and has indicated that he has no intention of ever doing so.
Advise Booth as to whether he can recover the $18,000 already paid.
Questions to consider in answering Question 8.5:
What is the purpose of the contract?
Is it contrary to public policy?
Does it fall within one of the classes of contract illegal at common law?
Will Booth be able to recover his money?
Are the parties in “in pari delicto”?
Question 8.7 from the text:
David and Cathy intend purchasing a restaurant business from a local entrepreneur. They wish to ensure that he cannot set up a competing restaurant or café in the area within 12 months after the purchase or they believe that the investment will not be viable.
Advise David and Cathy as to how far they can go with respect to restraining the vendor’s freedom of trade.
What if they go too far?
Questions to consider in answering Question 8.7:
What area of law is the question concerned with?
Is a contract in restraint of trade valid or void?
If a contract in restraint of trade is prima facie void, what does this mean?
How can David and Cathy protect themselves then? What factors determine whether a restraint is reasonable?
What is the effect on David and Cathy if the clause they insert is not reasonable?
See Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition
Question 28.11 from the text:
Olivia is a keen gardener. She is particularly proud of the large apricot tree in her back yard, the branches of which overhang her barbeque area and provide her with shade. Olivia awakes one morning, however, to discover that her new neighbours have lopped off almost half the branches of her apricot tree, hoping to get more light in their main bedroom.
Olivia is furious and seeks your legal advice.
Questions to consider when answering Question 28.11:
Is the damage to person or to property?
In light of the harm suffered by P, what is the most appropriate action? Trespass to land?
Can Olivia show a direct interference with her lawful possession of land?
Does there have to be an entry on to her land for a trespass to arise?
Did she consent to the lopping of the tree?
Do the neighbours have any defences available to them for their actions?