1
BSL165 FOUNDATIONS OF BUSINESS LAW
Assignment
This assignment is worth 20 marks. It must not exceed 2000 words (including
footnotes). It will be graded to 20% of unit marks.
Assignment Format
The assignment must be typed/word processed unless prior agreement has been
obtained from the unit controller. Please observe the following requirements:
| Font | – | Times New Roman, 12 point | ||
| Spacing | – | 1.5 | ||
| Margin | – | Normal: Top: 2.54cm Bottom: 2.54cm Left: 2.54cm Right: 2.54cm |
||
| Paper | – | A4 | ||
| Word Count | – | No more than 2000 words | ||
| Referencing | – | Legal referencing style in accordance with the | ||
| Australian | Guide | to | Legal | Citation: |
http://libguides.murdoch.edu.au/LegalCitation
Assignment submission
The assignment should be submitted by Monday 16 April 2018, 12pm.
You will submit electronically by 12 noon via the assignment ‘drop box’ link
available on LMS. Follow the following additional instructions:
a. When submitting assignments electronically, please use the Electronic
Cover Sheet available at:
http://goto.murdoch.edu.au/AssignmentCoversheet
b. Assignments should be submitted electronically.
c. Where assignments are submitted in Microsoft Word, the coversheet
and assignment should be submitted as a single file.
d. So your work doesn’t get mixed up with others’, use a filename which
follows the convention: Unit Code, the first three characters of your
last name, your first initial and your Student Number. e.g.
BSL165ChoJ12345678 for student Jun Chong.
2
e. If you need to submit a coversheet separately (e.g. when the
assignment is written in another package, such as Excel), append CS to
the same filename, to signify that this is a coversheet.
Assignments that do not have a signed electronic coversheet will not be accepted for
marking.
Plagiarism-checking software
Your Unit Coordinators may use software called Urkund when viewing work that you
submit. Urkund is a pattern-matching system designed to compare work submitted by
students with other sources from the internet, journals/periodicals, and previous
submissions. Its primary purpose is to detect any submitted work that is not original
and provide a thorough comparison between the submitted document and the original
sources. More information about how to avoid plagiarism is contained within the
Murdoch Academic Passport (MAP) unit
https://moodleprod.murdoch.edu.au/course/view.php?id=2684 . University policies on
academic integrity can be accessed here:
http://our.murdoch.edu.au/Educationaltechnologies/What-you-need-to-know/
Assignment marking guide
The mark for your assignment follows the IRAC method of answering legal problems
and will be determined by reference to the quality of its analysis, its clarity and
organisation, and its presentation, including its freedom from distracting stylistic
errors (grammatical, spelling, punctuation and typographical) as per below:
| Identification of relevant issue(s) |
| Discussion of the law relevant to the issue(s) |
| Application & analysis of the law to the facts provided |
| Presentation, flow & structure – coherency, unity & logic |
| Referencing |
The following grading guide provides a summary on how the grading will be
reflected. However, it should be noted that the guide is NOT an accurate predictor
of the grade. Some factors carry more weight that others and the marking guide
above summarizes the point distribution. Students should be aware that grading is a
balancing act and combines several factors. Thus, a paper may fail overall even
though it fulfils a passing standard on some of the criteria.
3
Extensions
Extensions can only be granted by the Unit Coordinator, Dr. Dennis Ndonga
([email protected]). Requests for extensions will only be granted if made
prior to a due date and the request must be sent via email stating the reason for the
request.
Penalties may also apply when an extension is granted.
| High Distinction (HD) |
Distinction (D) | Credit (C) | Pass (P) | Fail (N) |
| Accurate identification of all or almost all the fundamental the issued raised by the question with acknowledgement of surrounding issues |
Identification of almost all the fundamental issues raised by the question with limited acknowledgement of the surrounding issues. |
Identification of a substantive number of fundamental issues raised by the question |
Identification some of the fundamental issues raised by the question |
Failure to identify the fundamental issues raised by the question |
| Accurate and detailed examination of all the appropriate law relevant to the question with acknowledgement of conflicting principles |
Accurate and detailed examination of almost all the appropriate law relevant to the question with minimal acknowledgement of conflicting principles. |
Detailed examination of the appropriate law to the relevant question, with inaccuracies in some instances. |
Brief examination of some of the appropriate law applicable to the question, with a considerable degree of inaccuracy |
Failure to examine the appropriate law applicable to the question. |
| Accurate and detailed analysis of the applicable law(s) to the facts with extensive acknowledgement of all the material similarities or differences between the law and the facts |
Accurate and detailed analysis of the applicable law to the facts with minimal acknowledgement of the similarities or differences between the law and facts. |
Detailed analysis of the applicable law to the facts, with inaccuracies in some instances. |
Brief analysis of the applicable law(s) to the facts, with a considerable degree of inaccuracy. |
Failure to examine the applicable law(s) to the facts. |
| Clear and coherent structure with appropriately referenced supporting arguments |
Suitable and logical structure which reads well with minimal discrepancies in the flow of ideas |
Generally logical structure with occasional shortages in flow of ideas |
Broad defects in the structure and arrangement of ideas, which may be difficult to follow |
Incoherent arrangement of ideas which are generally hard to follow |
4
Extensions are at the discretion of the Unit Coordinator and will only be granted in
extenuating circumstances – computer failure/loss does not meet this test, as you
should prepare for such things. This means backing up your work and not leaving
things to the last minute.
If a student asks for an extension within 2 weeks prior to the due date, then the
student is required to show the Unit Coordinator as to what stage his/her
assignment is at. The reason for this is that you are expected to start working on
your assignment from the early weeks of the semester. Once the unit coordinator
sees that the student has been working on the assignment and the student would
have been able to submit on time, had those extraordinary circumstances not
come up, then an extension may be granted.
Once an extension is granted if the student does not submit by the extension deadline,
they will receive a zero.
Assignment more than one week late will not be accepted and an automatic score of
zero (0) will be awarded.
Late submission penalties
Late assignments will have 10% of the marks deducted per day or part thereof (i.e. 2
marks per day).
Word Length Penalties
Word lengths are an important indicator of the depth expected for a specific
assignment. Some assignments are very short and require you to develop the skill of
concise argument construction. Longer word lengths indicate a more in-depth
discussion/argument.
Each assessment you are given will include specific instructions, including a
designated word length. You are required to state the accurate word count for your
assessment on your cover page. This word count will include all in-text references
and subheading. Assignments which are within 5% of the designated word length will
not attract a penalty. Assignments which are more than 5% over the designated word
length will attract a penalty of 5% of the total possible marks for that assignment per
5% over the designated word length.
Markers will not read more than 15% over the designated word length.
*****Remember to always retain a copy of your assignment.
5
ASSIGNMENT QUESTION:
Steve is an alpaca breeder and carer. He owns a large farm in Mundaring, Western
Australia. As part of his services, Steve charges alpaca owners $100 per week to care
for their alpacas. For this amount Steve ensures that the alpacas are kept in a secure
enclosing and feeds them as well as provides fresh clean water each day. At night
Steve locks all the alpacas in his large barn.
One morning Steve notices that one of the pregnant alpaca is off its food and
displaying respiratory problems and producing nasal secretions. Steve attempts to call
the alpaca’s owner, Bianca, by calling the contact number left by Bianca when she
registered her details. The telephone is answered by Bianca’s housemate who explains
that Bianca has gone to Ecuador for 3 weeks and is uncontactable for that period.
Steve starts to explain to Bianca’s housemate about the alpaca’s condition but she
hangs up and Steve is unable to get through again.
Steve decides to keep an eye on the alpaca and the next morning the alpaca is a lot
worse and had contracted a fever and was dehydrated. Steve fears that the alpaca may
be suffering from a disease known as Bovine Viral Diarrhoea (BVD) and he again
tries to telephone Bianca but the phone goes unanswered. Steve rings the veterinarian
who attends and confirms that the alpaca is suffering from BVD and had a prenatally
infected five-month-old foetus, which had already died, and needed to be aborted via
emergency surgery.
The veterinarian seeks Steve’s permission and Steve agrees, knowing that without this
surgery the alpaca will die. The alpaca is transported to the veterinarian’s surgery.
The surgery is a complete success and the alpaca is back with Steve 3 weeks later.
One day after this Bianca returns to collect her alpaca. Bianca is very pleased that the
alpaca is alive but refuses to pay the extensive veterinarian’s bill and transportation
costs adding up to $3500 and claims that since Steve authorised the surgery, he should
be liable for its payment.
Required:
Advise Steve if he is liable for this $3500 bill or is there something Steve can argue to
avoid this liability? (20 Marks)
Restrict your analysis to legal principles and cases covered in Agency Law only.