LAW1500 S2 2022 Problem-Based
Essay
Description
Total Marks
Overall Weighting
Word Limit
Due Date
Essay
40
40%
2000 words
5 September 2022
at 23:55 AEST
Instructions
Using IRAC (issue-rule-application-conclusion) method, please answer the three questions
below. In seeking to identify the relevant legal issue(s) within these questions, please refer
to chapters 5, 6 and 7 of the required textbook in the first instance. Students are
welcome to engage in some independent legal research to provide additional support for
their answers, but students are not required to do so. In either case, the textbook should be
your starting point. Pay careful attention to the final sentence or paragraph in each question.
What are the key terms used? Review the sections of the textbook that deal with this
term(s). When you are familiar with the area of law, consider what legal issue(s) exist based
on the facts. Do not use the words ‘Issue’, ‘Rule’, ‘Application’ as headings or
subheadings in your answer. Do not rely upon the Australian Consumer Law. The
Assessment Moodle book on StudyDesk contains useful information regarding the
preparation and submission of problem-based essay questions.
Question 1 (10 marks)
XYZ Pty Ltd (XYZ) called for tenders for supplies of seedlings for its’ iceberg lettuce farm
with a closing date of 30 June.
The following tenders were submitted:
1. Lettuce R Us Pty Ltd hand-delivered its tender on 29 June to the head office of XYZ.
2. We Grow Pty Ltd posted its tender on 29 June. This letter arrived at XYZ head office
on 1 July.
Lettuce R Us Pty Ltd’s tender was the lowest of the two, however, XYZ awarded the contract
to We Grow Pty Ltd because of their outstanding reputation. XYZ posted a letter to We Grow
Pty Ltd advising that its tender was successful. Unfortunately, this letter never reached We
Grow Pty Ltd because it was accidentally destroyed by a disgruntled postal worker who had
just been made redundant. Since We Grow Pty Ltd had not heard from XYZ, it instead
entered into a contract with another grower and committed its full stock of seedlings to this
contract.
XYZ became aware of the full situation concerning We Grow Pty Ltd. It seeks advice
concerning its contractual position in relation to both tenders.
Question 2 (10 marks)
Joseph leased a shop in the Central Shopping Centre for the past three years. Joseph is
very concerned about his health and he has been diagnosed as suffering from a disease
that will result in him requiring constant care in the near future. The lease on the shop was
about to expire and the manager of the shopping centre, Thomas, told him that he had
‘better decide quickly’ whether he wanted to renew his lease because there were two other
potential tenants who would take his space ‘at a moment’s notice’. Despite being aware of
Joseph’s illness and needs, Thomas would only offer Joseph a new five-year lease at a
substantially higher rent. Joseph really wanted to retire to look after his health but felt like he
could not afford to give up the income from the shop. He reluctantly signed the new lease.
One year later Joseph received a large payout from a legal claim and could now afford to
retire.
Advise Joseph whether he is able to avoid the lease at common law.
Question 3: (10 marks)
Michael is a director of Road Bikes Pty Ltd (RB) which has developed sophisticated
engineering for manufacturing high quality handmade road bikes. RB has attracted attention
from professional and amateur cyclists’ around the State of Queensland. Michael is involved
in a serious cycling accident and is left no choice but to sell RB. George is a world champion
cyclist and is immediately interested in purchasing the business.
George prepares a contract for the purchase of RB and hands the contract to Michael. The
contract includes a term that would prevent Michael from opening another road bike
manufacturing business anywhere in Australia for the next 25 years. Michael and George
sign the contract.
Michael quickly recovers from his accident and wants to know whether there is any way he
can set up a new bike manufacturing business under common law. Advise Michael.
Assessment Rubric
#
Question 1
25%
HD (40-34)
Correctly identified the
key issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept. An
accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words. A
highly effective use of
the facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion that
directly addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including a
brief summary of the
most pertinent reasons
for the conclusion. (108.3)
A (33-30)
Correctly identified the
key issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept.
An accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words.
An effective use of the
facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion
that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including
a brief summary of the
most pertinent
reasons for the
conclusion (8.3-7.2)
B (29-26)
Identified a relevant
issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept.
An accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words.
Some use of the facts
to argue for or against
the application of a
legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion
that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including
a brief summary of the
most pertinent
reasons for the
conclusion. (7.3-6.3)
C (25-20)
Identified a relevant
legal issue(s). An
accurate statement
of the relevant legal
rule(s). A limited use
of the facts to argue
for or against the
application of a legal
principle or concept.
A conclusion that
directly addresses
the legal issue. (6.34.97)
F (15-0)
Identified an irrelevant
legal issue(s) or failed
to articulate any legal
issue(s). An incorrect
understanding and/or
reliance on a legal
rule(s). No use of the
facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. No
conclusion that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue. (4.97-0.0)
Question 2
25%
Correctly identified the
key issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept. An
accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words. A
highly effective use of
the facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion that
directly addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including a
brief summary of the
most pertinent reasons
for the conclusion. (108.3)
Question 3
25%
Correctly identified the
key issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept. An
Correctly identified the
key issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept.
An accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words.
An effective use of the
facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion
that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including
a brief summary of the
most pertinent
reasons for the
conclusion. (8.3–7.3)
Correctly identified the
key issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept.
Identified a relevant
issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept.
An accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words.
Some use of the facts
to argue for or against
the application of a
legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion
that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including
a brief summary of the
most pertinent
reasons for the
conclusion. (7.3–6.3)
Identified a relevant
issue(s), making
reference to the
applicable legal
principle or concept.
Identified a relevant
legal issue(s). An
accurate statement
of the relevant legal
rule(s). A limited use
of the facts to argue
for or against the
application of a legal
principle or concept.
A conclusion that
directly addresses
the legal issue. (6.34.97)
Identified an irrelevant
legal issue(s) or failed
to articulate any legal
issue(s). An incorrect
understanding and/or
reliance on a legal
rule(s). No use of the
facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. No
conclusion that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue. (4.97-0.0)
Identified a relevant
legal issue(s). An
accurate statement
of the relevant legal
rule(s). A limited use
Identified an irrelevant
legal issue(s) or failed
to articulate any legal
issue(s). An incorrect
understanding and/or
accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words. A
highly effective use of
the facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion that
directly addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including a
brief summary of the
most pertinent reasons
for the conclusion. (108.3)
Written
communication
Research
Referencing
25%
Highly effective and
professional writing
style. Excellent use of
spelling, grammar, and
punctuation. Very few
errors.
Evidence of a high level
of original research
which enhances
An accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words.
An effective use of the
facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion
that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including
a brief summary of the
most pertinent
reasons for the
conclusion. (8.3–7.3)
Effective and
professional writing
style. Few errors in
spelling, grammar,
and punctuation.
An accurate and
sufficiently detailed
description of the
relevant legal rule(s)
stated largely in the
author's own words.
Some use of the facts
to argue for or against
the application of a
legal principle or
concept. A clear and
concise conclusion
that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue, including
a brief summary of the
most pertinent
reasons for the
conclusion. (7.3–6.3)
Effective and
professional writing
style. Some errors in
spelling, grammar,
and punctuation.
Evidence of a high
level of original
research.
Evidence of original
research from a
number of different
sources.
of the facts to argue
for or against the
application of a legal
principle or concept.
A conclusion that
directly addresses
the legal issue. (6.34.97)
reliance on a legal
rule(s). No use of the
facts to argue for or
against the application
of a legal principle or
concept. No
conclusion that directly
addresses the
previously identified
legal issue. (4.97-0.0)
Numerous errors in
spelling, grammar
and/or punctuation.
Comprehension
difficult. Very many
errors in spelling,
punctuation and/or
grammar.
Evidence of some
original research.
All primary and
secondary sources
are referenced
Little or no evidence of
original research
application and
analysis.
All primary and
secondary sources are
referenced according to
Harvard (AGPS) or the
AGLC citation styles
with very few errors.
(10-8.3)
All primary and
secondary sources
are referenced
according to Harvard
(AGPS) or the AGLC
citation styles with few
errors. (8.3–7.3)
All primary and
secondary sources
are referenced
according to Harvard
(AGPS) or the AGLC
citation styles with
some errors. (7.3–6.3)
according to Harvard
(AGPS) or the AGLC
citation styles with
many errors. (6.34.97)
One or more primary
and secondary
sources are not
referenced according
to Harvard (AGPS) or
the AGLC citation
styles. This includes
failing to attribute a
quote to an author,
with or without
quotation marks.
In addition to the
reduction in marks,
submissions that fall
into this category
may be referred to
the USQ School of
Law and Justice
Academic Integrity
Officer.
(4.97-0.0)