FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT
Corporate Law and Industrial Relations
Due Date: 23rd May at 5:00 PM Mauritian Time
Submission via email to: email@example.com
The assessment aims to address the following unit learning outcomes:
1. Explain, analyses and apply basic legal concepts and principles relating to company law.
2. Apply appropriate research techniques to select, evaluate and use information from primary and secondary sources to make informed judgments about legal issues.
3. Write well-structured documents relevant to company law using appropriate language and styles.
The total assignment (meaning questions one and two) should be a minimum of 1000 words
and not exceed 2,500 words.
CASE STUDY (15%)
The case study requires students to resolve using the four step process. Students are required to apply the relevant legal concepts and principles to analyses and solve the legal issues arising in the case study by explaining and applying their knowledge of the legal principles and rules.
Note the four step process requires students to refer to legislation or case law as authority for the rules of law explained in step two. Where appropriate you will need to refer to any applicable legislation or case authorities. The four step process marking rubric for q 1 is as follows:
Identify the legal issue
No marks specifically (as this is usually stated in the question
Explain the rule(s) of law with reference to relevant authority.
The rules of law explained must be specifically applied to the facts so a solution can be found.
A logical conclusion should flow from the above steps
No marks specifically allocated
OVERALL USE OF THE FOUR STEP PROCESS AND STRUCTURE OF ANSWER 1 mark available
In relation to the marks allocated for the overall use of the four step process, structure of the answer and referencing, regard will be had to not just whether the answer is “set out” in the four steps. Consideration will be given to the clarity of the explanation of the law with regard to applicable authority where relevant. Students will be rewarded here for a detailed application of the facts to the law explained. For example, a very good use of the four step process would be the application of the facts specifically to every principle of law explained.
Consideration will also be given to the logical presentation, coherency and consistency of the explanation of the law, application of facts and subsequent conclusion. Consequently this will include a consideration of matters such as presentation, formatting, expression, sentence structure, grammar and the like.
As a general guide, a student who has used the four step process correctly for each question (has identified the relevant principle(s) of law, explained the rule(s), applied the facts and come to a logical conclusion), but where the explanation of the law or application of the facts is not as detailed as it could be, or the conclusion is not a logical progression of what has gone before, the student would be awarded a pass mark for this part of the assignment, i.e. 0.5 marks.
Referencing and appropriate acknowledgement of sources
Most often errors in referencing are incidental or clearly inadvertent. In the event of a level one incident of plagiarism occurring, a student may be contacted by the University and required to undertake further training or remedial work in relation to referencing. Where the lack of correct referencing appears to contravene the University policy on plagiarism, the student’s paper will be referred to the Unit Coordinator and dealt with according to University policy. This may amount to academic misconduct.
An important aspect of the University Plagiarism Policy is recognition that not all plagiarism incidents are intentional or involves cheating. If students are not learning as expected, they will be made aware of their difficulties and helped to improve. Those who deliberately choose to cheat by way of plagiarism, however, will be identified and dealt with accordingly.
Students are strongly advised to understand their responsibilities in relation to correct referencing.
You have to write an essay type question. The marking rubric is as follows
A solid introduction has been provided to introduce the relevant subject matter 2
Clear explanation of relevant principles of law.
Appropriate reference to legislation and case law is made in answering the essay question. Student uses these to explain/justify the statements made
The essay is structured - i.e. it has an introduction and conclusion and uses sub-headings where appropriate to structure the discussion.
The grammar, spelling and sentence structures are correct. Proper referencing style is used
For many years Roland has been the main pharmacist with the Pharma Save Company Ltd. His employment contract in clause 21 requires that in the event of Roland leaving his employment, he will not work “in competition with Pharma Save Company Ltd for 6 months”. Roland registered a company [Medisave Care Pty Ltd] and when he resigned from Pharma Save, he immediately became the managing director of Medisave Care Pty Ltd.
Pharma Save Company Ltd asserts that Roland is in breach of contract. Roland says that Medisave Care Pty Ltd is in competition with Pharma Save Company Ltd, but he personally is not. Later, Medisave Care Pty Ltd is found to be selling drugs in breach of the law. Roland claims that he is only an employee and that it is the company Medisave Care Pty Ltd that has broken the law, not he.
Using the four step process determine if Roland has broken the law or not.
15 Marks; 1500 words
Provide an analysis of the events which may lead to the veil of incorporation being pierced. Support your answer with sections of the Corporations Act and cases where appropriate.
15 Marks; 1000 words