law
ASSESSMENT 3: LEGAL CASE STUDY – SHORT QUESTION AND ANSWER (40 MARKS) For this assessment, students are to apply the concepts taught in the law modules for the unit (modules 9, 10 and 11) to a case study (Westpac: Washing Money in the Pacific) and answer four short answer questions. To best answer these questions, students may be required to research beyond the principles taught in the lectures and tutorials, and will be required to reference any external material that is used to form the substance of their answers. In breaking down the marks that are available for this assessment, each question is worth 9 marks for a total of 36 marks for the content portion of the assignment. The remaining 4 marks are awarded for the use of referencing and the structure / presentation of assignment submissions. Students are to integrate a completed cover page (a template is provided on blackboard) into their assignment document and submit their assignment file in soft copy format to a turnitin link in blackboard. A hard copy version of your assignment is not required to be submitted to your lecturer or tutor. Assessment Questions Read the Westpac: Washing Money in the Pacific case study and answer the following questions: 1. What areas of law are pertinent to this case study? Describe what the identified areas of law cover, and explain how they are relevant to the issues raised in the case study. (9 marks) 2. What is the business structure of the Westpac Banking Group? What does this structure say of the duties that the bank’s directors owe to its stakeholders, and how have the directors breached those duties by allowing the conduct that is detailed in the case study. (9 marks) 3. Describe the regulatory responsibility of AUSTRAC in the context of this case. In the findings of the 2018 Royal Commission into the Banking sector, what were some of the criticisms levelled by Commissioner Hayne against the other regulators (APRA and ASIC) who also had a regulatory role in preventing the type of conduct that had occurred in the case study? (9 marks) 4. What business risks were ignored by the Westpac executives, and what good governance and compliance practices could have been implemented to alleviate these risks? (9 marks) Below is the marking rubric which will be used to grade your submission: Question 1 – Relevant areas of law 0 – 2 marks Verylimited knowledge of topic with significant gaps between what was covered and whatanswer shouldhave addressed. Answer shows no conceptual understanding,or abilitytoapply those concepts in answeringthe question. 2 – 4 marks Limited knowledge of topic and will not have discussed relevant points in much detail. Answershowsa generallackof conceptual understanding,or abilitytoapply those concepts in answeringthe question. 4 – 5 marks Reasonable knowledge of topic but may not have discussed all relevant points in answer, or what was discussed oftenlacksdetail. Demonstratesa reasonable conceptual understanding and a sound ability to apply thoseconceptsin answeringthe question. 5 – 7 marks Good knowledge of topic but may not have discussed all relevant points in answer, or will have discussed all relevant points but will occasionally lack detail. Mostly demonstrates a high levelconceptual understanding and a very good ability to apply those concepts in answering the question. 7 – 9 marks Comprehensive/detailed knowledge of topic with discussion of all relevant points in answer. Consistently demonstratesan excellentconceptual understanding and an outstandingabilityto apply those concepts in answering the question. / 9 Question2– Business Structureof bank 0 – 2 marks Verylimited knowledge of topic with significant gaps between what was covered and whatanswer shouldhave addressed. Answer shows no conceptual understanding,or 2 – 4 marks Limited knowledge of topic and will not have discussed relevant points in much detail. Answershowsa generallackof conceptual understanding,or abilitytoapply those concepts in 4 – 5 marks Reasonable knowledge of topic but may not have discussed all relevant points in answer, or what was discussed oftenlacksdetail. Demonstratesa reasonable conceptual understanding and a 5 – 7 marks Good knowledge of topic but may not have discussed all relevant points in answer, or will have discussed all relevant points but will occasionally lack detail. Mostly demonstrates a high levelconceptual understanding and a very good ability to apply those 7 – 9 marks Comprehensive/detailed knowledge of topic with discussion of all relevant points in answer. Consistently demonstratesan excellentconceptual understanding and an outstandingabilityto apply those concepts in answering the question. / 9 abilitytoapply those concepts in answeringthe question. answeringthe question. sound ability to apply thoseconceptsin answeringthe question. concepts in answering the question. Question3– Regulatory responsibility of AUSTRAC 0 – 2 marks Verylimited knowledge of topic with significant gaps between what was covered and whatanswer shouldhave addressed. Answer shows no conceptual understanding,or abilitytoapply those concepts in answeringthe question. 2 – 4 marks Limited knowledge of topic and will not have discussed relevant points in much detail. Answershowsa generallackof conceptual understanding,or abilitytoapply those concepts in answeringthe question. 4 – 5 marks Reasonable knowledge of topic but may not have discussed all relevant points in answer, or what was discussed oftenlacksdetail. Demonstratesa reasonable conceptual understanding and a sound ability to apply thoseconceptsin answeringthe question. 5 – 7 marks Good knowledge of topic but may not have discussed all relevant points in answer, or will have discussed all relevant points but will occasionally lack detail. Mostly demonstrates a high levelconceptual understanding and a very good ability to apply those concepts in answering the question. 7 – 9 marks Comprehensive/detailed knowledge of topic with discussion of all relevant points in answer. Consistently demonstratesan excellentconceptual understanding and an outstandingabilityto apply those concepts in answering the question. / 9 Question4– Businessrisks, Good Governance and Compliance 0 – 2 marks Verylimited knowledge of topic with significant gaps between what was covered and whatanswer shouldhave addressed. Answer shows no conceptual 2 – 4 marks Limited knowledge of topic and will not have discussed relevant points in much detail. Answershowsa generallackof conceptual understanding,or abilitytoapply 4 – 5 marks Reasonable knowledge of topic but may not have discussed all relevant points in answer, or what was discussed oftenlacksdetail. Demonstratesa reasonable conceptual 5 – 7 marks Good knowledge of topic but may not have discussed all relevant points in answer, or will have discussed all relevant points but will occasionally lack detail. Mostly demonstrates a high levelconceptual understanding and a very good ability to apply those 7 – 9 marks Comprehensive/detailed knowledge of topic with discussion of all relevant points in answer. Consistently demonstratesan excellentconceptual understanding and an outstandingabilityto / 9 understanding, or ability to apply those concepts in answeringthe question. those concepts in answeringthe question. understanding and a sound ability to apply those concepts in answeringthe question. concepts in answering the question. apply those concepts in answering the question. Referencing/Str ucture/ Presentation 0 marks Coverpagenot included. Incoherent writing style with structure not appropriate to shortanswer format.Recurrent grammar, formattingand spellingmistakes. Noin-text referencingor referencelist provided. 1 mark Coverpagenot included.Largely incoherent writing style with structure not appropriate to shortanswer format.Recurrent grammar, formattingand spellingmistakes. Eitherin-text referencingor referencelist missing. 2 marks Cover page may / may not have been included.Good writingstylewith structure appropriate to short answerformat. Inconsistent grammar, formatting and spelling applied. In-textreferencing andreferencelist incompleteor contains errors. 3 marks Cover page included. Very good writing style with structure largely appropriate to short answer format. Grammar, formatting and spelling mostly accurate. In- text referencing and reference list provided that accords with Chicago referencing system. 4 marks Cover page included. Fluent writing style with structure appropriate to short answer format. Grammar, formatting and spelling accurate (little to no mistakes). In-text referencing and reference list provided that accords with Chicago referencing system. / 4 Referencing and appropriate acknowledgement of sources Most often errors in referencing are incidental or clearly inadvertent. In the event of a level one incident of plagiarism occurring, a student may be contacted by the University and required to undertake further training or remedial work in relation to referencing. Where the lack of correct referencing appears to contravene the University policy on plagiarism, the student’s paper will be referred to the Unit Coordinator and dealt with according to University policy. This may amount to academic misconduct. An important aspect of the University Plagiarism Policy is recognition that not all plagiarism incidents are intentional or involves cheating. If students are not learning as expected, they will be made aware of their difficulties and helped to improve. Those who deliberately choose to cheat by way of plagiarism, however, will be identified and dealt with accordingly. Students are strongly advised to understand their responsibilities in relation to correct referencing and should consult the unit outline and the referencing information in the Learning Hub section of the Blackboard site. IMPORTANT: As a part of the plagiarism monitoring process for this assessment, investigations are made into whether students have used contract cheating websites such as Chegg or Course Hero. The use of these websites in connection with this and the other assessments for the unit is strictly prohibited and the university has an account with these platforms to enable them to view postings of any assessment questions and identify which students have posted them. Any aspect of the student’s submitted work that matches an answer to any of the assessment questions that appear on these websites (as verified by the similarity report for the submission) will result in an automatic fail for this piece of assessment. Format of assignments Assignments cannot be handwritten and must comply with the following format requirements. Those assignments, which do not conform to these requirements without prior agreement of the unit coordinator, will either be returned to the student unmarked or will have marks deducted: Document type: Word or pdf (pdf preferred). Font: Arial or similar font - no smaller than 12 point in size. Pages: Numbered in top or bottom margin. Spacing: Appropriate line spacing and paragraph spacing. Margins: At least 2.5 cm top, left, right & bottom. Labelling of assignment file: Should include student’s Curtin ID number, their first and last names, and the title of the assignment (BLAW1002 Assessment 3 · Legal Case Study). Presentation A well-presented assessment will consider and meet the following criteria: · Cover sheet (located on Blackboard under the 'Assessment' tab) must be completed and integrated into your assignment document (The system will only allow you to submit one file so you won’t be able to submit your cover page and assignment document separately). · Appropriate sentence structure. · Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. · Paragraph size and breaks appropriate. · Consistent format. · Appropriate use of headings and sub-headings. · Within acceptable word limit. · Appropriate referencing and acknowledgment of sources. Word Limit The total assignment should be a minimum of 2,000 words and not exceed 2,400 words. Please provide a word count on your cover sheet. A penalty of 10% will be imposed on assignments that exceed the word limit. The assignment will not be assessed if it exceeds 2,600 words and will result in a ZERO mark. The word count does not include the following: ·