Subject Title Business Law for Managers
Subject Code LAW201A
Assessment Title Real Life Court Scenario (G)
a. Professional Expertise
b. Innovative Problem Solving
c. Skilled Collaboration
d. Agile Leadership
Learning Outcome/s (found in the Subject Outline) a. Explain the main features of the Australian and other relevant national legal systems.
b. Appraise the impact of the current legal system on a wide
c. Analyse the ethical implications of legal decisions.
Assessment type (group or individual) Group
Weighting % 45%
Duration 8-10 minutes
Due day Monday at 11:55pm Week 12
Submission type Student Declaration and Powerpoint link on Turnitin ?
Format / Layout of Assessment
Report and Presentation:
Powerpoint with voiceover
Turnitin (Report only)
Peer review (group presentation)
The purpose of this assessment to prepare a group Powerpoint presentation with voiceover on one of the topics to be selected from a variety of legal scenarios below.
You are to select one (1) of the following scenarios and present your arguments as part of a moot court presentation. In doing so, your group should be divided in two in order that one side presents the plaintiff’s arguments and the other side presents the defendant’s arguments.
Bill and his family are visiting Sydney for the weekend. They live in Victoria and decide to have a week away during the summer holidays. They stay at the Shangri-La Hotel and as part of their package, receive a buffet lunch each day. On their second day at the hotel, Bill slipped on some grapes that were on the floor near the lunch buffet. As a result of the slip, Bill broke his ankle and was required to undergo surgery. He was off work for a period of 2 months and was unable to earn an income. Bill is suing for the total sum of $150,000. At the time of the fall, Bill reported the incident to the banquet manager who indicated they were not sure how long the grapes had been on the floor before the slip occurred. The incident report also noted Bill had consumed a number of glasses of wine before the slip.
Representing Bill as the plaintiff and the Shangri-La Hotel as the defendant, you are to make arguments to the Court as to who is liable in negligence for Bill’s injuries. You should argue the case referring to the relevant legislation and any case law. You should also identify the relevant jurisdiction in which the claim is brought.
Suction Ltd is a company that specialises in selling vacuum cleaners. As part of its sales and marketing plan the salespeople commence by making phone calls to consumers who are selected from its customer database. The customers selected are elderly and from non-English speaking backgrounds. The Suction representatives who make the telephone calls follow a script during the call, in which they offer to have a Suction representative visit the consumer’s home and conduct a ‘free maintenance check’ on their vacuum cleaner. A Suction representative telephones Maria, an elderly lady with limited English. She agrees for a Suction representative to attend her home for a ‘free maintenance check’. Once inside the home, Maria is convinced to purchase a new
Suction vacuum at the cost of $2,000. Once Maria’s daughter finds out, she is very concerned as to her mother’s rights under the law.
Representing Maria as the plaintiff and Suction as the defendant, you are to make arguments to the Court as to who may be liable under the law. You should have reference to relevant legislation and any case law. You should also identify the relevant jurisdiction in which the claim is brought.
Claudia has been employed in a full-time capacity with a local events management company, Events Co. for 3 years. During that time, she has excelled in her job and secured a number of promotions. However, during the past 3 years, Claudia has never received any annual leave entitlements, sick leave entitlements and has not been paid superannuation. She is often required to work a minimum of 65 hours per week. She thinks she is underpaid.
Last week, Claudia told her boss she was pregnant. The next day, Claudia was called into the boss' office and told she was fired for not
performing well. Two days ago, Claudia saw her job advertised. In the job advertisement, it said -only males should apply for this position-.
Representing Claudia as the plaintiff and Events Co. as the defendant, you are to make arguments to the Court as to whether Claudia has any recourse under the law. You should have reference to relevant legislation and case law. You should also identify the relevant jurisdiction in which the claim is brought.
This is a group assessment. You will be required to complete a Peer Evaluation as part of this assessment.
The moot court presentation should be between 8 - 10 minutes.
Readings for the assessment
Legislation available at: www.austlii.edu.au
Grading Criteria / Rubric See attached below
Assessment 3 Report and Moot Court Presentation – Marking Rubric
Criteria HD (85-100) D (75-84) CR (65-74) PASS (50-64) FAIL (0-49)
(Weighting 50 %)?
Presentation identifies the correct Court, jurisdictional limits, Court etiquette and advocacy styles. Presentation correctly identifies the correct jurisdiction to commence litigation, confidently and persuasively builds arguments that are consistent with legal principles and incorporates binding precedent to arguments. The report and presentation are highly focused and coherently integrates examples from the course readings and/or other research, evidence of deep analysis with rich discussions and arguments. Presentation largely identifies the correct Court, jurisdictional limits, Court etiquette and advocacy styles. Presentation correctly identifies the correct jurisdiction to commence litigation, confidently builds arguments that are consistent with legal principles. The report and presentation are well focused with arguments and discussion being mostly based on examples from course readings with some other research. Presentation attempts to identify the correct Court, jurisdictional limits, Court etiquette and advocacy styles. Presentation may identify the correct jurisdiction to commence litigation, builds arguments that are mostly consistent with legal principles. The report and arguments show focus and demonstrates evidence of some discussion and arguments but may be mostly descriptive in direct response to the prompt. Presentation attempts to identify the correct Court, jurisdictional limits, Court
etiquette and advocacy styles although one or more of these may be incorrect. Presentation may identify the correct jurisdiction but arguments are not largely consistent with legal principles. The report and arguments may lack focus and have a tendency to rehash the work of others without making significant additions. Presentation demonstrates a shallow grasp of the material and key elements of the Court system and legal principles. The group does not demonstrate grasp of the content and has difficulty providing a report and presentation relevant to the topic.
(Weighting 10%)? Utilises and relies on the correct legislation including subsections and a range of precedents in support of arguments. Utilises the correct legislation and relevant precedents in support of arguments. Utilises the correct legislation in support of arguments. May identify some of the correct legislation in support of arguments. Does not identify any correct legislation in support of arguments.
(Weighting 25%) Arguments are presented imaginatively, articulately, confidently and persuasively. Consistently applies the correct Court etiquette and rules when presenting arguments and addressing the Arguments are presented articulately and confidently. Largely applies the correct Court etiquette and rules when presenting arguments and addressing the Court. Tenders evidence consistent Arguments are presented clearly, Attempts to apply the correct Court etiquette and rules where presenting arguments and addressing the Court. Pace is appropriate to audience. Arguments are presented satisfactorily. Applies some of the correct Court etiquette and rules where addressing the Court. Pace is satisfactory most of the time.
Arguments are not presented clearly. Arguments are difficult to understand. Does not grasp Court etiquette and/or rules.
Page 4 of 5
Court. Tenders creative evidence consistent with arguments. Pace is appropriate to audience. with arguments. Pace is appropriate to audience.
(Weighting 15%)? Group collaboration is evident, with individual stories finding voice within the group’s presentation. Group collaboration is evident through the synthesis of individual stories. Group collaboration is evident in the creation of a cohesive presentation. Group work may be focussed on cooperation rather than collaboration. Limited or without evidence of input from all group members.
Page 5 of 5