1 LAW10003 Contract Law II Assessment details Critical Case Comment Due: 11pm Monday 6 August 2018 Length: 1500–2000 words (bibliography and footnotes not counted in the word limit; any excess will...

File attached


1 LAW10003 Contract Law II Assessment details Critical Case Comment Due: 11pm Monday 6 August 2018 Length: 1500–2000 words (bibliography and footnotes not counted in the word limit; any excess will not be marked) Weighting: 40% Learning outcomes: 1–5 (see below) Submission method: electronic copy only via Turnitin Your assignment is expected to demonstrate that you can: 1. identify the legal and policy issues in complex contractual cases and hypothetical situations; 2. apply relevant legal principles to the resolution of these issues; 3. critically analyse aspects of contract law from a particular theoretical perspective; 4. develop high levels of skill in the reading of statutes and/or cases; and 5. write in clear and logical language. Purpose The purpose of this assessment is to provide you with the opportunity to demonstrate and further develop your critical analysis skills in the area of Contract Law. You may want to refresh your understanding of what critical analysis is in the context of law by revisiting the study materials for LAW00111 Legal Process. Whilst Contract Law is traditionally considered to be a ‘black letter’ law unit, it is clear from the theories and critical perspectives (introduced in LAW10001 Contract Law I and Chapter 1 of your prescribed text), that judges are influenced by different social and policy considerations in the judgments they make. It is important that you develop the skill of analysing cases to reveal these influences. This assessment item gives you the opportunity to do this. 2 You are asked to analyse an area of Contract Law so as to gain a deeper understanding of the social and policy considerations that may influence the development and application of current legal principle. This will assist you to develop the following capacities:  to read and comprehend complex legal decisions   to engage in sophisticated arguments based on legal principle, and   to formulate principled arguments to extend or modify the application of existing laws. Assignment question Read the following case: Case: Brisbane City Council v Group Projects Pty Ltd [1979] HCA 54 http://eresources.hcourt.gov.au/showbyHandle/1/11467 Guiding question for your case comment: Does the decision in Group Projects support the understanding of the role of the court as stated by the proponents of Classical Contract Theory? Assignment instructions You are required to prepare a critical case comment on this case in light of the material you are learning in this unit – that is, the material contained in the relevant topics (Topics 1 and 2) in your Study Guide and readings, and through your own research. Use the guiding question to assist you to construct your analysis and to guide your research. In particular, it asks you to engage in a critique that identifies how Classical Contract Theory has (or has not) influenced the decision made by the judges in this case. That is, you are expected to engage in an explicit discussion of Classical Contract Theory (which includes the related discussion in the text of Promise Theory and Consent Theory) in your analysis of this case (see in particular, TB: [1.05]-[1.25]; CB: [1.05]-[1.25]). The word limit given indicates the maximum number of words for your work. However, it also guides you in relation to the expected length of your work. If your work falls far short of the minimum word limit, you are unlikely to achieve a good mark. Ideally, your answer should meet the minimum word count but must not exceed the maximum word limit. Any words exceeding the maximum word limit WILL NOT BE MARKED. The word limit is prescribed to ensure that students’ work is comparable and that no student is advantaged when they write an excessively long piece of work enabling them to explore issues more carefully than other students who have stayed within the prescribed limits. You must provide a reference to any materials to which you refer. You must also provide footnotes as appropriate, and a bibliography of materials used, and must use footnotes as outlined in the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (3rd ed). http://eresources.hcourt.gov.au/showbyHandle/1/11467 3 References do not form part of your word count. For this reason, footnotes should contain only citation information. Any other information provided in footnotes will be ignored. If the information is worth saying – say it in the body of your written work! Structure of your case comment Your case comment should use the following format: 1. Case citation 2. Brief summary of facts 3. Brief summary of procedural history 4. Brief summary of the ratio decidendi *5. Critique We suggest (at the very least) you outline the basics of Classical Contract Theory and explore at least one, if not more, of the relevant theorists (i.e Fried, Smith, Barnett) mentioned in your textbook and/or casebook in respect of their view of the role of the court to ‘fill gaps’ (imply terms or end a contract by frustration). You should also examine (although you are certainly not limited to) the academic articles referred to in the footnotes of your textbook/casebook for Topics 1 and 2). 6. Brief conclusion to draw together the themes/ main points of your critique. * Note well – this section (the Critique) of your discussion is the most significant to the skills being tested by this assessment. We strongly recommend that you allocate sufficient words from your word limit to explain and demonstrate your critique. As a rough guide, about half of your total words should be used to write this section. Marking criteria for this assessment  States parameters/focus of the case comment   Provides accurate summary of facts of case   Provides accurate summary of ratio decidendi   Demonstrates a well-developed critical analysis of the case by: o developing argument (position) in response to question  o developing argument (position) accurately, coherently and persuasively and o supporting its arguments with appropriate and relevant evidence   Paper well organised and structured   Quality of written expression – clear and concise, with accurate spelling and grammar   Citations accurate, comprehensive and according to AGLC (3rd ed) Return of Assignments For only those Assignments submitted on or before the due date, every effort will be made to mark and return these assignments to students within three weeks of the due date. 4 Marked Assignments will be uploaded to the Grade Centre in your MySCU learning site. The Unit Assessor reserves the right to set an alternative assessment task where for any reason an Assignment has not been handed in within three weeks after the due date. Paraphrasing and Plagiarism The failure to provide a citation and/or to paraphrase (unless direct quotes are appropriate) when you refer to the work of others amounts to a breach of the University’s policy on Student Academic Integrity and may result in you obtaining a fail in this unit or facing other disciplinary sanctions. Do not be tempted to use someone else's work and pass it off as your own – such action constitutes plagiarism. This includes paying someone else to prepare your work – this is a very serious form of academic dishonesty. If an allegation under the Student Academic Integrity policy is proven against you, as well as having penalties imposed by the University, you are very likely to have to disclose this matter if you seek admission to the legal profession (and possibly to other professional accrediting bodies). Legal profession admitting authorities take ALL forms of academic dishonesty very seriously and may deny or delay the admission of any person against whom an allegation of plagiarism or academic dishonesty has been proven. Severe penalties are also imposed by the University in response to all forms of plagiarism and academic dishonesty. Plagiarism is very easy to detect for people whose job it is to distinguish between styles of writing. Plagiarism is committed when a person takes ideas from the literature or from another student and presents those ideas as his/her own. Though you may not present someone else's work word-for-word, you are required to acknowledge the author of the original source even if you re-phrase, embellish or simply change it around. If you quote the actual words of the author, then merely to provide a footnote indicating the source of the idea, this is insufficient. You must also provide quotation marks, or indent a lengthy quotation. There must also be a footnote indicating the exact source of the quotation. The habit of taking notes verbatim from any source may get you into trouble if you fail to note the origin of those sources. It is easy to later forget that the notes are verbatim and to include them into an assignment. Plagiarism is avoided by always acknowledging the source of any ideas, statements, etc, if they have come from another person's work. You do this by using the correct referencing practices. To ensure you understand the seriousness of plagiarism, when submitting your assignment you are required to explain the Turnitin Similarity percentage for your paper. More guidance is available on MySCU to assist you. IMPORTANT: Do not allow someone else to do your assignments for you. You are the one enrolled in the award, not your mentor, tutor, husband/wife/partner/best friend – or an online tutor service that is paid to complete academic work. Allowing someone else to complete your assignments – whether for fee or not – is a form of academic dishonesty for which severe penalties apply. All of these behaviours could amount to ‘cheating’ under the Academic Integrity Policy – harsh penalties will be applied if an allegation of cheating is proven against you. A proven allegation of Academic dishonesty or any other type of fraud will impede any future application for admission to legal practice.