Case Study Response and in-class Presentation Task

109 views 9:53 am 0 Comments September 19, 2023

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: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,