BUSN 1019 – Individual Written Assignment, Semester 2, 2018
Proportion of Marks: 30%
Word Limit: 1500 words
Due Date: Friday 14 September 2018 at 4.00 pm
• Assignments must be lodged electronically through FLO as a single word document.
• Assignments are to be prepared on an individual basis – you may not discuss your assignment answers or prepare assignment work with other students. This is collusion – a breach of academic integrity.
• Collusion, plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty are treated as serious offences by the University and are subject to harsh penalties, which may include expulsion from the University. Ensure that you have read and understood the University’s policy on academic dishonesty, as contained in the Student related Policies and Procedures Manual, for further information refer to:
• Penalties apply for late submission and/or exceeding the word count – please refer to page 2 of the Statement of Assessment Methods
Further Information and Instructions are on the following pages.
1) Purpose of Assignment
The purpose of this assignment is to provide an opportunity to develop the following skills:
1. Navigating legislation and identifying sections relevant to a particular issue;
2. Reading and interpreting sections of legislation;
3. Use the IRAC method to engage in preliminary legal problem solving in a commercial scenario; and
4. Referencing and footnoting using the Australian Guide to Legal Citation.
2) Using Legal Resources and Referencing
For this task you will need to obtain a copy of the Partnership Act 1891 (SA). This can be found at: https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/PARTNERSHIP%20ACT%201891/CURRENT/1891.506. AUTH.PDF
In addition to this, you should also refer to Chapter 20 of the textbook, especially the case example boxes. These cases may assist with interpreting the legislation to a certain extent.
For the purpose of this assignment these are the only resource you need to use. You do not need to research any other legislation or research any other case law.
You must correctly cite and footnote the legislation and cases in accordance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation version 3 (AGLC v3). AGLC is a footnoting system. A simplified guide to AGLC v3 has been uploaded on the FLO site. Please remember, if you are citing a case based on information from the textbook (i.e. you have not actually read the case), then your citation needs to reflect this – please refer to the AGLC guide.
3) Scenario and Questions
Todd and Zac are best friends who both attend a university in Adelaide. Todd is a business student majoring in marketing and Zac is a science student majoring in chemistry.
Todd and Zac like beer and last year they decided to make their own home brew. Zac, using his own money, purchased a 50 litre micro-brew equipment set. Todd and Zac worked together to set up the equipment in Todd’s Dad’s shed and they created their first batch of beer. Their initial batch of home brew was actually quite good, and Zac then started experimenting with a range of different grains and fermenting processes. Zac discovered a way which he could use eucalyptus leaves to speed up the fermenting process and enhance the flavour of the beer. They entered their brew into the “Adelaide Extravaganza” home brew contest at the end of last year and won two awards: one for “best tasting beer” and another for “best brewing innovation”. Unfortunately, there was no prize money.
After winning the award, Todd started thinking about how they could turn their new beer into a big commercial success, and actively marketed the new beer, which he decided to call “Gum Drop Ale”. Zac was less interested in the business side of things but was happy to keep refining his recipe and the fermenting process. Zac thought Todd would eventually lose focus and was doubtful that Gum Drop Ale would be a big success. However, at the same time, Zac was quite happy to try to make some money doing something he enjoyed.
Over the summer break, they continued operating out of Todd’s Dad’s shed to refine the brewing process for commercialisation. In the first few weeks of the summer break, Zac spent most of his time in the shed working on the brewing process and doing experiments with eucalyptus and fermentation. Todd spent that time marketing and networking. For one such marketing venture, Todd gave free beer to all the guests at his brother-in-law’s office Christmas party. Todd’s brother-in-law, Denton, is a big shot lawyer. Both Todd and Zac attended the party.
At the Christmas party, Todd was approached by Klaus who is the director of a beer and wine distribution company. Klaus was interested in negotiating a supply contract with Todd, and arranged a meeting with Todd in January.
Todd, sensing a big commercial break, decided to lease a section of a warehouse to give the business a professional feel and so that there was enough room to increase production. Todd entered into a one-year lease agreement, which he negotiated orally with the owner of the warehouse. Todd borrowed $10,000 from his Dad to pay a security bond, and three months’ rent in advance.
When Zac saw the new premises he said: “cool … our new lab ” but didn’t ask anything about the lease or rent. The next day Zac moved the brewing equipment and his laptop (which contained files outlining the brew recipe and formulas for his innovative fermentation process) to the warehouse.
At the end of January, a number of problems arose:
- Todd discovered that Zac had been selling some beer to Zac’s family and friends, and Zac had kept the money to himself. Todd confronted Zac on this. Zac responded by saying: “It’s my invention I can do what I want … you don’t own me.”
- Unfortunately, the negotiations with Klaus fell through and Todd wasn’t able to strike a deal. The business didn’t have enough money to pay the rent.
- Zac and Todd received a letter from Denton’s law firm informing them that they were being sued for $50,000. It turns out that the beer supplied at Denton’s office Christmas party was defective, and all the guests got sick. Denton suffered reputational loss and is blaming Todd and Zac.
After all this, Zac decided that he no longer wanted to take part in the business. Zac met with Todd at the warehouse and said:
“Sorry bro … but I am totally over this …. I am out.”
Todd was furious and responded:
“You can’t do that, we have rent and bills to pay. I can’t cover these expenses without your help …. You can’t just quit!”
Zac ignored him and started loading the brewing equipment and laptop into his car. While this was happening, Todd yelled at Zac and said:
“that property belongs to the business, you can’t just take it. At least give me a copy of the
recipe and formulas!”
Zac continued to ignore Todd, finished loading his car, made a rude gesture at Todd and then drove off.
Zac and Todd are not best friends anymore.
Based on this information, you need to use the IRAC method to answer each of these questions:
A. Does a partnership between Todd and Zac exist? In the “A- Analysis/Application” part of your answer, make arguments both for and against the existence of a partnership.
For questions B-F, you should assume that a partnerships does exist.
B. Is Zac entitled to the money from the beer he had been selling?
C. Who is liable to pay the outstanding rent?
D. If Denton successfully sues Zac and Todd, who is liable to pay the compensation?
E. Can Zac leave the partnership in the way he did?
F. Is the brewing equipment, Todd’s laptop, and recipe and formula partnership property?
- Answer each question separately using the IRAC method
- The “Issues” have been broadly identified for you in the questions. You need to think about how to clearly phrase them in your answer and also what facts are relevant to those issues.
- Before attempting to answer the questions, read the Partnership Act and identify the relevant sections. You should start with the relevant legislation. Case law can be added to the analysis where it assists with your interpretation of the legislation.
- Do not quote large sections of the legislation or cases. As a guide, only quote the most pertinent aspects. You should keep long quotations (three lines or more) to a minimum.
- Please have a look at the marking rubric on the following page. Your assignment will be marked in accordance with this guide.
- Word Limit Breakdown Guideline:
o Question A – Approx. 500 words o Questions B-F – Approx. 200 words each
- Please also remember that references in the footnotes are not included in the word-count.
Practical Legal Problem Analysis
Criteria F P C D HD Comments
Issues No attempt to deal with issues separately.
Some attempt to separate issues. Most issues separated. Some attempt to articulate issues concisely. All issues addressed separately. Some attempt to articulate issue clearly All issues clearly separated and identified. Issues articulated clearly and concisely with appropriate use of headings.
Rules Does not correctly identify any legal rules or all legal rules are incorrect or irrelevant to the issue in question.
Identifies some relevant legal rules correctly and relevantly. Correctly identifies relevant legal rules for most issues. Identifies relevant legal rules for all issues. Use of legislation and case law. Comprehensively identifies relevant legal rules (including both legislation and case law) for all issues.
Conclusion No linkage between rules and facts.
Minimal, or unclear links made between components of rules and facts. Analysis present but unclear. Some clear linkages between facts and rules. Some
inaccuracies and/or lack of detail in use of facts. Relevant conclusion. Components of relevant rules applied with links to specific facts. Some minor inaccuracies. Relevant conclusion flowing from analysis. Components of most relevant rules accurately applied with links to specific facts. Minimal or no inaccuracies. Relevant and persuasive conclusion flowing from analysis.
Writing Words consistently used inappropriately or inaccurately. Spelling and grammar consistently inaccurate. Sentences and paragraphs lacks coherent organisation or structure. Meaning significantly compromised.
Some words used inappropriately or inaccurately. Spelling and grammar contains inaccuracies. Some sentences and paragraphs lack coherent organization or structure. Difficult to read. Some of the
meaning compromised. Minimal words used inappropriately or inaccurately. Spelling and grammar generally correct. Most sentences and paragraphs are structured but lack precision. Transition
between ideas mean reading
lacks efficiency and fluidity in places. Meaning is generally ascertainable. Minimal words used inappropriately or inaccurately. Most spelling and grammar correct. Sentences and paragraphs generally well-structured. Transition between ideas is logical and reading is mostly efficient and fluid. Meaning is mostly clear throughout. Appropriate and accurate word choice throughout. Spelling and grammar correct. Sentences and paragraphs well-structured. Transition between ideas is logical and reading is efficient and fluid. Meaning is clear throughout and ideas expressed are persuasive.
No clear attempt to reference work.
Work referenced but AGLC incorrectly applied and/or overuse of quotes
Demonstrates appropriate use of footnoting broadly in accordance with AGLC. Some inaccuracies and/or overuse with quotes.
Appropriate and accurate footnoting in accordance with AGLC but with minor issues. Minor inaccuracies with quotes.
Appropriate and accurate footnoting in accordance with AGLC. Appropriate use of quotes.