Recent Question/Assignment

Company Law – BBAL401
Term 1, 2018
Company law Group Assignment and Presentation
Learning Outcomes:
On successful completion of this assignment, students will be able to:
• Recognise the laws relating to companies in Australia; and
• Examine the duties, rights and responsibilities of company officers
Due date: Week 6.1
1. Form a group of 2 students.
2. A case below will be allocated to you. You must then • Research and study the case.
• Prepare a power point presentation (see below for PPT instructions)
• You must also submit a fully written assessment of the case submitted via turn-it-in.
3. The length of the written assignment is to be approximately 1500-2000 Words. (Each member of the group must write 750-1000 words).
4. The written assignment and presentation slides must be in the IRAC method. Maximum 8 slides with around three short points per slide.
5. Each member of the group is to present two parts of the IRAC method (I= issues and facts; Relevant laws and principles; A= Arguments of the parties and analysis, C= conclusion and court outcome).
6. The task is worth a total of 40% of your final marks. (20% written assessment + 20% class presentation)
Power Point Presentation:
Your presentation guidelines- • No more than 8 slides
• Be appropriately referenced
• No more than 10 minutes in duration
• Do not read your presentation. You are being marked on content, as much as presentation style
• A hard copy for the PP must be handed to the lecturer at the beginning of your presentation for marking purposes
Group topics
Group 1 – Lee v Lee’s Air Farming Ltd (1961) AC 12
Group 2 – Macuara v Northern Assurance (1925) AC 619
Group 3 – Guildford Motor Co Ltd v Horne (1933) Ch 935
Group 4 – Hickman v Kent or Romney Marsh Sheep Breeders’ Association (1915) 1 Ch 881
Group 5 – Eley v Positive Government Security Life Assurance Co Ltd (1875) 1 Ex D 88
Group 6 – Parke v Daily News Ltd (1962) Ch 927
Group 7 – Darvall v North Sydney Brick & Tile Co Ltd (1988) 6 ACLC 154
Group 8 - Vines v ASIC (2006)
Group 9 - ASIC v Adler (2002)
Group 10 – Furs v Tomkins (1936) 54 CLR 583
Group 11 - ASIC v Rich (2003)
Group 12 – Canadian Aero Services v O’Malley (1973) 40 DLR (3rd) 371
Group 13 – Cooks v Deeks (1916) 1 AC 554
Group 14 - ASIC v Vizard (2005) FCA 1037
Group 15 – Daniels v Anderson (1995) 13 ACLC 614
Group 16 - Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995)
Group 17 - Northside Developments Pty Ltd v Registrar-General (1990)
Group 18 – Briggs v James Hardie & Co Pty Ltd (1989) 7 ACLC 841
(If there are more than 18 groups, begin allocation of the cases again from the top ie: Group 1 (B), Group 2 (B), Group 3 (B), ect.
2
Group presentation and assignment
Assessment and Feedback Form
Group
Members _____________________________________________________________
Term/Date:
Group oral
presentation and visual slides
(Colour, font, design, pictures, graphs, spelling, grammar, punctuation etc)
(Vocal abilities, eye contact, body language, knowledge of the topic, cohesion of the material )
/20
Written Assignment:
• Identify the facts of the case
• Explain the relevant law relating to the case
• Discuss the legal arguments raised by the
parties in case
• Summarise the judgement of the case.
• llustration the role, purpose and scope of the case in today’s Corporations Law.
/10
Written Assignment: • Grammar
• Spelling
• Referencing
• Language
• Structure /10
SUBJECT TOTAL
/40
3
Criteria High Distinction 80% - Distinction 70%- 79% Credit 60-69% Pass
50-59% Fail
0-49%
Group oral presentation and visual slides
At all times:
1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; engaging;
4. the presentation slides were logical and structured; and 5. the oral presentations were interesting and engaging.
At all times:
1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; and 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured.
Most of the times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; and 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured.
Some of the times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; and 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured.
At no times:
1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; and 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured.
Written Assignment:
Identify the facts of the case
All of the facts are clearly and accurately detailed with reference to cases with similar facts. All of the facts are clearly and accurately detailed. All of the relevant law is clearly and accurately summarised. Some of the facts are clearly and accurately outlined in brief. The facts are not clearly or accurately outlined.
Written Assignment: Explain the relevant law relating to the case All of the relevant law is clearly and accurately detailed, and the Act and related cases are referenced and discussed. All of the relevant law is clearly and accurately detailed. Most of the relevant law is clearly and accurately summarised. Some of the relevant law is clearly and accurately outlined in brief. The relevant law is not clearly or accurately outlined.
Written Assignment:
Discuss the legal arguments raised by the parties in case
All the legal arguments are clearly and accurately detailed, and there is a synthesis with the relevant law.
All the legal arguments are clearly and accurately detailed.
Most of legal arguments are clearly and accurately summarised.
Some of the legal arguments are clearly and accurately outlined in brief.
The legal arguments are clearly or accurately outlined.
Written Assignment: Summarise the judgement of the case
The decision of the judge is accurately detailed with reference to any dissenting judgements or precedents. The decision of the judge is accurately detailed. The decision of the judge is accurately summarised in summary format. The decision of the judge is accurately outlined in brief. The decision of the judge is inaccurate or incomplete.
Written Assignment:
Illustrate the role, purpose and scope of the relevant court, or tribunal. The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were perfectly
clear, logical, formatted, and grammatically correct.
The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were perfectly
clear, logical, formatted, and grammatically correct.
The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were very clear, logical, formatted, and grammatically correct.
The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were fairly clear, logical, formatted, and grammatically correct.
The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were absent.
ASSESSMENT TOTAL
SUBJECT
TOTAL

Looking for answers ?


Recent Questions

subject is advance network security.I have added private key and for public for other students you will need my uni moodle access. I will give detrails once assignment is confirmed. COIT20262 - Advanced...Assessment-3 DetailsUnit Code and Title: SBM4104 IT InfrastructureAssessment 3: ProposalDue date: Week 10Group/individual: IndividualWord count / Time provided: 2500 wordsWeighting: 40%Unit Learning Outcomes:...You need to write a discussion post of 450-500 words with APA references.Here are the details:Identification of EEF and justifications of tools for impact analysisIdentify enterprise environmental factors...Hi, this is Cert 3 in retail course, so how much you think it cost please?Table of Contents Assessment Information ..........................................................................................................................SOC10236 Applied Ethics and SustainabilityAssessment detailsAssignment 1 Part A -Consequential ethical analysisDue: 11 pm 29 March 2019Word guide: 750Weighting: 20%You should follow the ‘Assignment Planning’...2. Part CPlease refer to the Auditing Standard ASA 570 Going Concern, identify factors (financial and non-financial) that you would consider when assessing whether the CIO will continue its operation as...Detailed Assignment InformationAssignment 2INDIVIDUAL VIDEO ASSIGNMENT — 30%Key informationDates/submission Sunday by 11.59pm (midnight Sunday) in Week 7 on Turnitin link on MKT1MDP LMS page/ submit per...Show All Questions