Page 1 of 5
ASSESSMENT TASK | |
Subject Code and Name | LAW301 Business and Corporations Law |
Assessment | Assessment 1-Case Study Response and in-class Presentation Task |
Individual/Group | Individual |
Length | 1500 words +/- 10%- and 5-Minute Presentation |
Learning Outcomes | This assessment addresses the following subject learning outcomes: a) Identify the key features of the Australian legal system and demonstrate an understanding of the law that governs the business environment in relation to agency, property, contract, torts, business structures and consumers. c) Interpret legal problems which arise out of the formation and use of business structures, research relevant legal sources, propose suitable outcomes and identify possible challenges to any proposed outcomes. d) Apply knowledge based analytical and deductive reasoning skills to develop insights into various business situations and find appropriate legal solutions. |
Due Date | By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Week 5 (Module 3.1) |
Weighting | 30% |
Total Marks | 100 marks |
Page 2 of 5
Instructions:
You have been assigned below, a fact scenario/case study which you will be required to analyse
utilising the IRAC approach. You will be expected to:
✓ Identify the legal issue(s) arising from the given scenario or case study
✓ Identify the appropriate legal rules that require discussion in the case study
✓ Apply the law to the facts of the case study
✓ Reach a reasoned conclusion/ give practical advice to your client.
Your analysis should refer to appropriate cases and statutes, where applicable and be referenced
using the APA Referencing style. Please see more information on referencing here
https://library.torrens.edu.au/academicskills/apa/tool
You will be required to consider whether the Law of Torts, Law of Contract or the Australian
Consumer is relevant to the given scenario and to elect which of the three areas to focus on in
your response.
The task will assume your knowledge of the content covered in module 1.1 to 3.1 and particularly
that which may be relevant to the scenario given. Your response will be given in the form of a
memorandum of advice, to be addressed to the instructing person, with your concise and
informed opinion on the best course of action. It is expected that you will read through and be
well familiar with the content in the covered modules and that you will support your responses
with appropriate case law and/or legislation that is relevant to the Australian context.
The completed task will comprise a memorandum of advice that should not exceed 1500 (+/-10%)
words.
Presentation
You will also be required make a presentation of not more than five minutes, where you will present your
analyses in summary form, so that the completed presentation will have a summary of the arguments
made in your memorandum of advice whilst ensuring that your structure aligns with the instructions
above.
Submission Instructions
Please submit this task via the Assessment 1 link in the main navigation menu in LAW301 –
Business and Corporations Law by 11.55 AEST Sunday of Week 5 of the relevant trimester. The
Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can
be viewed in My Grades.
Page 3 of 5
Assessment Task
Read the following case scenario and answer the question that follows in not more than 600-800 words
(+/- 10%). The word count will exclude any reference list.
You are an employee in the operations department of a mining company, Fantastic Mining Pty Ltd. The
company has entered into a contract with a staffing solutions provider, Worker Solutions Pty Ltd, to provide
staff on an ongoing basis, to drive the mining trucks that are operated by Fantastic Mining Pty Ltd. The
agreement between Fantastic Mining Pty Ltd and Worker Solutions Pty Ltd is that the staffing company would
provide the workers and pay their wages whilst determining their work system and rosters, while the mining
company would be responsible for maintaining the trucks to ensure that they are in good working order and
are safe to drive when needed.
On the morning of 7 December last year, Simon was driving one of the trucks, having been instructed by
Worker Solutions to do so. On his way to the mines Daniel requested to hitch a ride in the truck, so that he
could get to and repair one of the trucks that had stalled at the entrance of the main mine. Daniel was a local
mechanic who had been requested by the mining company to repair the truck and he intended to drive it
back to the base. As he boarded the truck that Simon was driving, he failed to see the sign on the door of the
truck that stated, “No unauthorized passengers are permitted at any time”. As the ride to the mines was a
short one, Simon did not think twice about giving Daniel a ride. The trip to the mines was a rather bumpy one
and as Simon was navigating the final bend towards the mines at a considerably high speed, he lost control
of the truck, which toppled over and eventually landed on its side. In the process the passenger door of the
truck, which was faulty, flung open and Daniel was thrown out of the truck onto the road where he landed
heavily and broke his right arm. Daniel was hospitalised for a few days and lost the use of his arm for two
months.
It is now February in the following year and your Operations Manager, Stan Lee, has passed on to you a letter
from Daniel’s solicitors demanding that Fantastic Mining accept liability for the injury suffered by Daniel. Stan
believes that it is Worker Solutions that should be held responsible and would like you to write a
memorandum of advice on whether there are grounds to hold Worker Solutions Pty Ltd liable, so that he can
present it to the management committee of the board of directors of Fantastic Mining Pty Ltd.
Required
With reference to relevant legal principles, use the IRAC legal problem-solving approach to draft a suitable
Memorandum of Advice that addresses the nature of the claim that Daniel may make against Fantastic
Mining Pty Ltd and whether in fact Daniel and/or Worker Solutions Pty Ltd can be held liable in any way.
Page 4 of 5
Assessment Rubric
Criteria | Fail 0-49% |
Pass 50-64% |
Credit 65-74% |
Distinction 75-84% |
High Distinction 85-100% |
Identification of legal issues 10% |
Little or no relevant issues identified and discussed. |
Limited relevant issues identified and discussed. |
Majority of relevant issues identified and discussed. |
Identification of most relevant legal issues. |
Comprehensive and concise identification of all relevant legal issues. |
Identification of the relevant law 20% |
Misstatement or minimal statement of the relevant legal rule. |
Limited identification of relevant legal rules. |
Identification of most legal rules and/ or some rules lack proper legal reference. |
Identification of most relevant and applicable legal rules that that include proper legal reference. |
Comprehensive and concise identification and discussion of all relevant legal rules that include proper legal reference. |
Application of the relevant law to the facts 35% |
Mistaken or lack of application of law to the fact scenario. References to case law and or legislation are absent or inaccurate |
Satisfactory application of law to the fact scenario. There are some references to case law and or legislation, but they are not always suitably deployed or cited. |
Good application of law to the fact scenario although in some areas, a more detail application is required. There are a good number of references to case law and or legislation and they are often suitably deployed or cited. |
Very good application of law to the fact scenario that reflects individual thought. The student demonstrates very good understanding of legal rules although at times, a more detailed application is required. There are references to case law and or legislation in support of most arguments and they are mostly deployed and cited with accuracy. |
Detailed application of law to the fact scenario that reflects individual thought. The student demonstrates well developed understanding of legal rules by relating each element of the law to the fact scenario. There are references to case law and or legislation in support of all arguments and they are consistently deployed and cited with accuracy. |
Conclusion 10% |
The conclusion is absent. |
Conclusion is kept short, but it contains errors. |
Conclusion is kept short and answers the question at hand and is supported by the forgoing argument. |
Conclusion is kept short, answers the question at hand and is supported by the forgoing argument. |
Conclusion is kept short, answers the question at hand and is supported by the forgoing argument. The student considers the legal consequences of the application. |
Page 5 of 5
Criteria | Fail 0-49% |
Pass 50-64% |
Credit 65-74% |
Distinction 75-84% |
High Distinction 85-100% |
Form, structure and language 10% |
The submission does not contain the required elements of a memorandum of advice. There are frequent or repeated flaws in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation. |
The submission contains some elements of a memorandum of advice. There are flaws in expression, grammar, spelling and/ or punctuation |
Students mostly use professional language. The submission contains most of the required elements of a memorandum of advice. There are some flaws in expression, grammar spelling and/ or punctuation. |
Students use professional language. The submission contains the required elements of a memorandum of advice. The submission reflects individual work and independent thought. There are occasional minor flaws in expression, grammar, spelling and or punctuation. |
Students use professional, precise and appropriate language while the submission contains all the required elements of a memorandum of advice. The submission reflects individual work and independent thought. There are minimal errors in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation. |
Presentation 15% |
The presenter didn’t understand the topic; the specific audience has not been considered; little or no supporting material is used; main and supporting points do not relate to each other. |
The presenter showed an understanding of some parts of topic; the specific audience has been vaguely considered; few main points are supported by specific law; supporting material is imprecise, unclear, or redundant; few main and supporting points relate to each other. |
The presenter showed a comprehensive understanding of the topic; the specific audience has been partially considered; some main and supporting points include specific law; most main and supporting points relate to each other. |
The presenter showed a developed level of knowledge about the topic; it is implied that the specific audience has been considered; the main and supporting points include relevant, specific law; almost all the main and supporting points relate to each other. |
The presenter showed an exemplary level of knowledge about the topic; the specific audience has clearly been considered; all main and supporting points are grounded by specific law; the main and supporting points all relate to each other. |
Tags: alwaysopen, assignmenthelpaustralia, assignmenthelpmelbourne, assignmenthelpsydney, assignmenthelpwebsites, london, londonstudent, melbourne, myassignmenthelp, plagiarismfreework, studentassignmenthelp