You must answer the two problem-type questions below, using the ILAC (Issues, Law, Application, Conclusion) format, a worked example of which is in the Resources folder.
Please note that the word limit of 2 000 words is a total for both questions (ie, it is not 2 000 words for each question). I would however expect that students should be able to answer both questions in far less than 2 000 words. Your bibliography is not included in the word limit.
**In this subject, assignments are marked on-line, using an adapted MS Word programme. You therefore MUST submit your assignment in Word format, NOT as a PDF document. If you submit in PDF it will not be able to be marked.**
***If you anticipate applying for an extension for this assignment, please read the rules on extensions in this Subject Outline before doing so.***
Question 1 (10 marks)
Qantas Airlines Ltd signs a contract with Airbus Corporation Ltd for Airbus to build a new aeroplane. On average, Qantas would make $ 800 000 profit per day from using such an aircraft.
The contract has 545 terms. Term 56 says that the plane must be able to travel 10 000 km at 800 km per hour. Term 455 says that the aircraft must have an in-flight video system capable of showing 36 channels of entertainment to passengers.
After the contract is signed, Airbus sends to Qantas a package containing a large number of documents, including the contract itself and examples of the colour scheme that will be used. In the middle of these documents there is also a new document headed ‘Limitation of Liability’, the key part of which states as follows:
The liability of Airbus Corporation Ltd for breach of contract is capped at $ 300 000.
When the plane is delivered, its engines are as required, but, due to confusion at the factory, the wrong software has been loaded into the entertainment system, which has only 34 channels. It would take a week to re-configure the software. Advise Qantas Airlines fully as to what its legal position is, citing relevant case law.
Question 2 (10 marks)
Frank runs a shop that sells appliances such as ovens, fridges and freezers. He is a sole trader – his business is not incorporated. Gemma is employed by Frank as a salesperson. Among the second-hand appliances in the shop is a dishwasher, priced at $ 350. One day Tom, is browsing in the store, sees the dishwasher, and says to Gemma “That’s a great price – I will just go home to see if I have space for it”.
Gemma’s niece, Frances, is getting married next month. Gemma knows that Frances needs a dishwasher. Gemma quickly phones Frances and says “Get to the store quickly – I think I can get my boss to agree to take $ 300 for a fantastic dishwasher”. Gemma tells Frank that she doesn’t think that the dishwasher will ever sell for $ 350, but that a customer might pay $ 300. Frank authorises Gemma to sell the dishwasher for $ 300. Frances comes in and Gemma sells it to her at that price. Later, while Gemma is on her lunch break, Tom comes in to the store. When he inquires about the dishwasher, Frank tells him that it was sold that morning for $ 300. Tom tells Frank that he would gladly have paid $ 350 for it.
Another salesperson, Bob, has the job of selling large quantities of washing machines to commercial laundries. He has frequently negotiated with Angela, who owns a chain of laundries, to sell her washing machines. Bob frequently comes to work late and is sometimes drunk. One Friday afternoon, Frank says to Bob “You are fired with immediate effect – clear out your desk and leave”. Frank then rushes off to a meeting across town without making sure that Bob actually leaves the premises.
Bob sends an email to Angela, saying that he has just received ten new industrial washing machines which he can sell to her for $ 1 000 each. Angela agrees, and makes an electronic transfer of $ 10 000 in payment, saying that she will collect the machines on Monday. Bob withdraws the $ 10 000 from the Home Appliance Specialists bank account and disappears overseas with it. When Angela comes to collect the machines on Monday, Frank refuses to give them to her, saying that Bob had no authority to sell them as he had been fired. Angela has sued Frank for delivery of the machines.
Give Frank legal advice in relation to the above situations.
**Please check that your assignment complies with the rules in the Style Guide before you hand it in.**
This assessment will allow you to demonstrate your ability to:
engage in legal research;
identify the legal issues arising out of novel factual situations, to analyse the applicable law and to differentiate between which rules are applicable and which are not and then apply the law to the problem;
to explain and summarise the applicable law in such a way as to create a report for a client which states what liabilities arise from novel factual situations
And more specifically:
your knowledge of the law of contract
your knowledge of the law of agency
your ability to undertake an assessment task relevant to the workplace and professional practice.
CRITERIA HD DI CR P FL
Students are required to answer two problem type questions in order to demonstrate: To meet this level you will achieve a cumulative mark of 85-100%. A mark in this range indicates that a student: To meet this level you will achieve a cumulative mark of 75-84%. A mark in this range indicates that a student: To meet this level you will achieve a cumulative mark of 65-74%. A mark in this range indicates that a student: To meet this level you will achieve a cumulative mark of 50-64%. A mark in this range indicates that a student: At this level you will obtain a mark of 0-49%. A mark in this range indicates that a student:
Identification of relevant legal issues Correctly identifies all legal issues and formulates them clearly with consideration of all links to relevant law with no errors. Correctly identifies all legal issues and formulates them with consideration of links to relevant law, with only minor errors. Identifies and correctly formulates most major legal issues, taking into consideration most links to relevant law. Identifies some legal issues, with some errors in formulation.
Considers some links to relevant law. Identifies no relevant issues or only a few of them. Some of these may be unclearly formulated. Considers few links to relevant law.
Explanation of law, citing relevant legal authority Provides a complete explanation of the law with no errors. Explains all relevant legal authority. Provides an explanation of almost all points of the law with few errors, substantiated by most of the relevant legal authority, with only minor errors. Provides an explanation of most points of law with few errors, substantiated by citation of most of the relevant legal authority with few errors. Provides a basic explanation of the law, but with some errors, substantiated by limited legal authority. Provides incorrect or limited explanation of the law using little legal authority.
Application of legal principles to the facts Applies the law to the facts so as to address all issues with no errors. Argument discusses linkages between facts and the law and considers counter-arguments. Conclusion clearly draws together arguments. Applies the law correctly to the facts so as to address all issues, with only minor errors. Argument discusses linkages between facts and the law. Conclusion draws arguments together. Applies the law correctly to most issues arising from the facts, but with some errors. Argument summarises application of the law. Conclusion summarises arguments. Makes a basic attempt to apply the law to the facts, but applies wrong law and / or contains significant errors in the application.
Resultant answer is incomplete. Paper does not correctly apply law to the facts and / or applies incorrect law. May be descriptive, rather than putting forward a reasoned argument.
Compliance with the Style Guide and overall structure. Uses Style Guide comprehensively, accurately and consistently. Uses ILAC model. Extremely well structured and organised, with one main argument introduced per paragraph, supported by well-written supporting sentences. Uses Style Guide accurately and with only minimal errors.
Uses ILAC model. Well structured, with some differentiation of arguments between paragraphs. Use of Style Guide, with some errors or lapses. Uses ILAC model and is clearly structured. Limited or inconsistent use of Style Guide. Some attempt at use of ILAC model and in structuring
answer but with errors. Poor, inconsistent or inaccurate use of Style Guide. Poorly structured. Inadequate or no use of paragraphs. May have disregarded the ILAC model.
Written expression and editing. Uses appropriate academic writing which is formal, impersonal and which contains no spelling, grammar and punctuation errors. Paper demonstrates careful proofreading. Uses appropriate academic writing which is formal, and impersonal with only very minor spelling, grammar and punctuation errors. Paper demonstrates careful proofreading. Uses appropriate academic writing which is formal and impersonal, with a few spelling, grammar and punctuation errors. Paper demonstrates evidence of proofreading. Significant spelling, grammar and punctuation errors but the paper is readable and demonstrates some attempt at proofreading Poor grammar, spelling and/ or punctuation. Paper gives no evidence of having been proof-read.