question is attached in the filethere are 2 parts part A is 1250 words and part B is 750 words
Commercial Law 2 – Semester 1, 2022 Case Study / Research Report – 25% Weighting Refer to the http://courses.highered.tafensw.edu.au for the specific requirements of this assessment task. This assessment involves complex scenarios involving multiple areas of law requiring in depth analysis, problem solving and judgement with reward for the use of properly referenced academic and other independent sources beyond those presented in tutorials [2,000 words]. All submissions must address both Part A & B. Student submissions should include a simple cover page that includes word counts for each question. In-text citations must be in the Harvard AGPS style. A single Harvard AGPS Reference List at the end of the submission should include all relevant references cited in both questions. Students should note the PDF file on acceptable legal abbreviations, available on the Moodle. Students should note the word limits for each question, and the need to write concisely. Responses must be within 10% +/- of each word limit. Students must clearly state the word count for each question, on their cover page. Note that the reference list and footnotes (if any) does not form part of the word count. Students are encouraged to start writing early; editing typically takes more time than writing. Part A - Case Study – 1,250 words [15 marks] Russell is the manager for Fast Campers Pty Ltd. During July 2021 he visited the offices of PWD [a large accounting partnership with several hundred staff and turnover of many millions per year] to collect the payroll reconciliation and Business Activity Statement (BAS) for Fast Campers. PWD prepares the BAS, STP payroll, and annual tax returns for Fast Campers. Walking back to his car, which he had parked in the laneway behind the PWD office, he saw some papers in a box near PWD’s rubbish bins. Upon closer inspection, many of Fast Campers’ bank statements and other business documents that PWD used for the accounting work appear to have been put out in the rubbish in the laneway behind their offices. Russell put all the documents in his car and took them back to the Fast Campers office, and placed the box in a secure storeroom. One Saturday in February 2022, Russell was working at the annual Campervan Expo, and during a quiet period went over to look SJ Campers display [Fast Campers’ main competitor]. Russell discovers the new SJ ‘Super Camper’ is exactly the same design and colour as Fast Campers’ new ‘Soopa Campa’ model, which has many innovative features. The SJ van is much cheaper than the Fast Campers van. Fast Campers set their price at $195,000 to recoup their years of research and development, while the SJ campervan is priced at just $140,000. During the weekend Expo, SJ Campers sell hundreds of their Super Campers and Fast Campers sells only two (2) Soopa Campas. Russell heads back to the Fast Campers office to inspect the box of documents he found in the laneway behind PWD’s offices. Fast Campers had sent their plans and design documents to PWD some months ago to make sure that all R&D tax allowances were correctly included in their accounts and tax returns. The documents and plans for the Soopa Campa are not in the box he found. Russell calls the PWD office and Anna (a PWD partner) answers. Anna confirms that the documents are not in the files in PWD’s office, and that she recalls all Fast Campers documents being disposed of some months prior. Anna insists such documents are always securely shredded and disposed of. The SJ Camper head office backs onto the same laneway as PWD’s office. Required: Identify any legal rights that may be available to the parties in the scenario given above, from both contract and tort law. Apply the legal rights you have identified to this scenario, including any remedies that may be available. Justify your arguments by citing relevant legislation and case law. Part B - Research Task - 750 words [10 marks] Research the decision in Maiden Civil (P&E) Pty Ltd (receivers and managers appointed) v Queensland Excavation Services Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 852 and explain:- (a) Which competing security interest had priority and why? (b) If Queensland Excavation Services Pty Ltd had registered their security arrangements on the Personal Property Security Register, would they have been enforceable against Fast Financial Solutions Pty Ltd? Explain why.