BCL203 Business Law, Compliance and Governance T220 Assessment 2
Due Date: Week 10 (Sunday 11:59pm)
Total marks: 30 marks (2 questions worth 15 marks each)
Learning Outcomes: see Unit Outline
Rubric/Grading: see Unit Outline
Word limit: 1200 words max (including ref list, headings etc)
Topic: Contract Law (see chapters in part. 7,8, 10, 11, 13 of Gibson text) Instructions
Students are to work individually to answer 3 short case study legal problem-solving questions from the topic of contract law.
Students are required to use the H.I.R.A.C. legal problem solving structure to answer both questions (see below).
WHAT IS H.I.R.A.C.?
H.I.R.A.C. provides a way to approach and organize an answer to a legal problem question. The acronym H.I.R.A.C. stands for:
Heading: Firstly, give your answer a heading that shows the names of the parties involved or which shows the specific topic you are investigating
E.g.: “Jane v John” or “Validity of Mr Smith’s Contract Against a Minor”
Issue: Next, you identify and state what appears to be the legal issue/s as you read it from the problem question
E. g.; “The legal issue is whether the contract can be enforced due to one party being a minor”
Rule: Next, find the relevant law (sections from an Act or a principle from a case) that can help determine an answer to the legal issue/s you have already identified. With case law, you are just looking for the decision (ratio) or legal principle NOT the background facts.
E.g. “Nash v Inman (1908): a minor can be liable under contract for supply of “necessaries” if the minor does not have adequate supply of these.”
Application: Apply the law (from the Rule section) to the “facts” of the problem question
E.g. “The law states that minors can become liable for contracts for necessaries. In this case however, the minor in question does not appear to need any of the goods or services that
have been contracted for…”
Conclusion: Finally, draw a conclusion based on your arguments under Application
E.g. “Therefore it is unlikely that the contract against the minor will be enforceable”
TASK: Use HIRAC to find a legal answer to each of the below three (3) case studies:
Case 1 Rod v Andy
Andy offered to purchase Rod’s penthouse and gave Rod 6 weeks for a definite answer. Rod, on the basis of this offer, bought another apartment. Before the 6 weeks expired, but after Rod had bought the second house, Andy withdrew his offer. Is Andy entitled to do this?
Case 2 Hardie v Laurel
Laurel sent out a circular to all his clients which read: ‘We are instructed to offer for sale by tender the stock-in-trade of ABLE Imports … which will be sold at a discount in one lot … The tenders will be received and opened at our offices’. Hardie submitted the highest tender but Laurel refused to sell the goods to him. Had a contract been concluded between the parties?
Case 3 Sam v Carla
Carla decided that it was time to sell her car. However, she was not certain of its value and so, when she advertised the car, she left out the price. When Sam responded to the advertisement, he asked for the price. Carla responded by saying, ‘Oh, I don’t know. I guess a fair price would be around a couple of thousand dollars’. When Sam arrived the following day with $2000 for the car, Carla told him that she really meant $3000