LAWS7023
WEEK 2/3 Contract Law
15% Assignment同步拓展课
TUTOR:Shelly
全球累计服务⽤户超⼗万
1)
毕业于UQ Professional Accounting and Applied Finance
2)
3)
Laws7023的GPA：7分，tut作业全满分，已授课4个学期！
掌握Mr.
Anthony Austin安东尼老师的给分点和注重点.
Tutor照片
4)
5)
6)
7)
善于整理lecture重点知识点；匹配作业合适的课堂案例和法律.
授人以渔，高效学习，学习氛围轻松，让法律课程不再枯燥！！！
超级喜欢小猫咪，课余时间🉑一起交流养猫🐱小技巧～
同学们有什么学习方面的问题，随时群内交流。有问必答！
学科特点及学习方法
学科特点：
1)
知识点琐碎并量多，部分条款不易理解；
2)
作业要求较强的逻辑性！！！
3)
作业以案例分析题✍来考查；需要编写长篇分析文章;
4)
法律条款知识点与案例具体事件结合分析，主要考查案例分析能力。
学习方法：
1)
及时理解法律条例，按时完成每周作业，不要拖延，拒绝❌明日复明日；
2)
及时整理好每章知识点，尤其是人名案例🌰（案例的起因，经过以及法院判决的结果👩⚖👨⚖）
3)
一定要珍惜5次2分小作业的机会，满分的分数代表你的分析思维和文章框架符合老师要求！！！
全学期内容
1
作业简介
2
作业内容解读
3
经典题型演练
4
知识点精讲
5
作业难点总结
作业简介
考试结构剖析
1.
Tut exercise: 5个案例分析，每个2分。（10分）
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
2.
W2 合同法 【难度：⭐⭐⭐】
W3 合同法 【难度：⭐⭐⭐】
W9 董事职责1 【难度：⭐⭐⭐】
W10 董事职责2 【难度：⭐⭐⭐】
W11 成员权利以及破产管理清算 【难度：⭐⭐】
第一个Business Law Assignment（15分）
--- W2/3合同法【难度：⭐⭐⭐⭐】
3.
第二个Business Law Assignment（25分）
--- W4消费者法或W5侵权法【难度：⭐⭐⭐】
4.
Final Exam（50分）
--- W6-12公司法的3个案例分析题～【难度：⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐】
Assignment介绍
作业标题：24S1 15% assignment - Contract Law
DDL：待更新
题目数量： 评价他人作业+自我案例分析
提交形式：（Online- Turnitin）
作业权重： 15%
作业额外要求：Do NOT write about Laws of Formation of Contract and do not write
about Sales of Goods legislation and any laws, rules or regulations in relation to clothes,
fashion or garment industry). （待核实）
只可以运用Lec的ppt和supplement资料！！！拒绝使用课外内容，会严重影响分数！！
作业内容解读
Assignment 作业内容解读
1) One Answer to the ILAC Question from a Pretend Student （2.5）
a) provide the pretend student with a mark out of 12.5.
b) Evaluate the quality of the IL&AC answer and the IL&AC technique
c) provide detailed commentary
上节课重点内容回顾
内容回顾：ILAC
I：？
L：？
A：？
C：？
ILAC 介绍 (Issue – Law - Applica2on – Conclusion )
o Issue – What’s the biggest legal problem in dispute between the parties;
§ 1/2 Facts - 1/2 Legal Issue (当事人的某种行为 + 是否违反了某条法律）
o Law – Identify what is the most relevant law applicable to the facts of the question;
§ 直接抄写用到的PPT上的法律条款 （条款名称，条款内容）
§ 🌰: S15AA Cth AIA, an interpretation best achieving Act’s purpose or object is to be preferred;
o Application – the most important part - applying the law listed in your law section to the facts of the
question;
§ 运用到的法律条款。Here, 运用该条款进行辩论。(段落连接词：In addition，However）
o Law and Application
§ 🌰: S15AA Cth AIA, an interpretation best achieving Act’s purpose or object is to be preferred. Here,
Tom will argue that ... (段落连接词：In addition，However）
o Conclusion – Who has the strongest legal argument? (写application中的结论，不可无中生有)
§ On the balance of probabilities, a court would likely find that the strongest argument is (固定句式)
§ On the balance of probabilities, the court would most likely decide that （固定句式）
Assignment 作业内容解读
o I：Issue section:
Ø biggest most relevant legal issue: 是否提出?
Ø 是否使用issue technique?
o L：LawAndApplication section (Law section)
Ø most relevant and important law: 是否提出?
Ø 是否使用LawAndApplication section technique?
Assignment 作业内容解读
o A：LawAndApplication section (Application section)
Ø application of law to the facts: 你认为怎么样？
Ø 是否使用most relevant law去回答问题和解决双方的争端？
Ø 是否有得出arguments的过程？
Ø 是否将laws组合去支持相对应的facts？
Ø 是否考虑过双方可以用来对抗对方的法律? (包括strong和weak arguments)
Ø 这个学生的回答对于ILAC answer是否可以用到final exam? (他的回答好与坏?)
Assignment 作业内容解读
o C：conclusion section
Ø conclusion部分怎么样？
Ø 你同意这个学生的conclusion吗？
Ø 是否使用conclusion section technique?
o 对于学生答案的谈判方法有何想法？
o IL&AC technique上：学生表现好的方面，以及坏的方面
o 是否遵循了3DS去写ILAC answer？
Assignment 作业内容解读
2) One ILAC problem question （12.5）
Ø write their OWN ILAC Answer to the ILAC Question
2.Mandatory Three Draft Strategy (3DS): 只有最终的提交草稿将被评估，但是三个稿子都需要提交！
o
研究初稿-对假冒学生答案的初步评注及有关问题适用法律的研究;
o
第二稿-进一步评论冒充学生的答案和ILAC的问题答案草稿
o
24小时反思-相关法律?质量的应用程序?-告诉考官你是如何和为什么提出你的论点的;
o
第三次最终提交草稿-你对模拟学生答案的评论的最终版本-并添加任何其他相关法律，并为你的
ILAC问题的最终版本的ILAC答案改进你的申请
Assignment 作业内容解读
3.字数要求
Ø 第一部分 + 第二部分 = 可以写最多4500字(不包括作业封面和脚注，页眉，页脚)
4.作业格式要求：
o 文件命名：
•
Students Name Research Draft and Initial Commentary;
•
Students Name Second ILAC Draft and Further Extensive Commentary;
•
Student Name Third Final Submission ILAC Draft and Commentary.
Assignment 作业内容解读
4.作业格式要求：
o 为Third Final Submission Draft设置个封面，只需要包含下面信息即可，无固定格式
•
Title: LAWS7023 | Business and Corporate Law 15% Business Law Problem Question Submission –
Semester 1 2024;
•
Student Number: (Insert Your Student Number);
•
Course Code: LAWS7023;
•
Family Name: (Insert your Family/Last Name);
•
First Name: (Insert your First name);
•
Course Name: Business and Corporate Law;
•
Tutorial: (Insert the date and time of the tutorial class you are enrolled in)
•
Total Word Count: (Insert your Total Word Count for your submission – not including the cover
sheet, header, footer and footnotes);
Assignment 作业内容解读
4.作业格式要求：
o Font, Headers and Footers:
o
字体要求：size 11 or size 12 font ；font styles are Arial or Calibri;
o
单倍距： Students must use single line spacing;
o
Third Final Submission draft的每一页都要有页眉和页脚
o
Example of Header:
Ø Students Name (Example “Anthony Austin”) Student Number (Example: “44689342”)
o
Example of Footer:
Ø Course Code 7023 Course name: Business and Corporate Law Assignment Title: Business Law
15% Submission
Assignment 作业内容解读
4.作业格式要求：
o Footers:
5
H2
0
H
W2知识点讲解
W2 Formation of Contracts
o A contract is a legally enforceable agreement. An agreement is a meeting of minds, and exists
when two or more people share understanding and intention.
合同是具有法律效力的协议。协议是思想的一致，当两个或更多的人分享理解和意图时就存在。
o Contracts can be made verbally, in writing or implied by the conduct of the parties.
合同可以是口头的、书面的或由双方当事人的行为暗示的。
o 大多数商业合同是在稍后的日期形成并完成的，每一方都有持续的义务，直到最后完成。
重难点总结-W2 formation of contract
重难点总结-W2 formation of contract
考点5. Terms of a Contract 合同条款
考点5.1 Terms vs Representations
The courts look at the time immediately before, or at time of signing the contract, and apply the
following tests to work out if statements were intended to be a term of the contract or not:
Exercise:
法院查看合同签署前或签署时的时间，并应用以下测试来判断陈述是否属于合同条款:
Ø Intention – reasonable person test - Was it in the form of a promise – written or oral; 是以书面或口头
承诺的形式吗?
Ø The language used by the parties; 当事人使用的语言;
Ø The context in which the statement was made; 作出该声明的背景;
Ø The time the statement was made - the time lapse between the making of the representation and the
signing/entering of the contract; 作出声明的时间-作出声明至签署/订立合约之间的时间间隔;
Ø The maker of the statement; and 陈述人;和
Ø The importance of the statement to the innocent party. 陈述对无辜者的重要性：如果无辜者不知道陈
述不真实，签订合同后，可上诉获得赔偿。
14. De Lasalle v Guildford – drains（租房-水管不正常工作）.
考点5.1 Terms vs Representations
14. De Lasalle v Guildford
签订合同前，⼝头承诺没问题，合同中未提及该承诺；但 是合同之后出现了问题
结果：原告胜诉，⽀持⼝头承诺！
o Facts
•
双方就被告Guildford房屋的租赁协议进行了谈判。然而，原告De Lassalle在协议最终敲定后签署
了这份文件，但他拒绝交出文件，除非他确信房子里的下水道状况良好。被告Guildford先生口头
表示一切正常。然而，租赁协议中没有提到下水道。后来，申索人De Lassalle发现排水管不正常
，因此向被告Guildford提起诉讼，要求赔偿其违反保证的损失。
o Issue
•
租约是否为合同的warranty，使索赔人有权获得违约损害赔偿?
o Decision/Outcome
•
法院认为“warranty不需要特殊的文字形式。”它必须是通过双方明示或默示的协议构成合同一部
分的附带承诺，然后应作为交易的一部分进入交易。被告确实违反了保证warranty，因此，索赔
人有权获得损害赔偿。
o 总结：原告D租了被告G的房子，被告G欺骗原告D房子下水道状况，原告D可索要赔偿。
o 案例来源：https://simplestudying.com/de-lasalle-v-guildford-1901/
考点5.2 Express Terms 明示条款
Express Terms – various ways by which a representation becomes an express term of the contract, such
as:
明示条款——陈述成为合同明示条款的各种方式，例如
o Inclusion in a signed written contract - If a term is in a written contract signed by the parties, it is an enforceable
term, even if one of the parties has not read or understood the written contract.
• 包含在签署的书面合同中——如果某一条款出现在双方签署的书面合同中，则该条款是可强制执行的条款，
即使双方中有一方尚未阅读或理解该书面合同 [15. L’Estrange v Graucob (1934);（原告L没有读合同而签
字，合同条款是可强制执行的）]
o Oral or Writing - Giving a party reasonable notice Of the term before they entered in to the contract;
• 在当事人订立合同o 前就合同条款给予合理通知（如：口头或书面）;（enforceable term）
Note: If a statement was brought to the attention of a party after the contract had been formed, it will not be an
express term;
如果一项声明是在合同成立后提请一方注意的，它将不是明示条款 (16. Olley v Marlborough Court)
考点5.2 Express Terms 明示条款
15. L’Estrange v Graucob (1934);（原告L没有读合同而签字，合同条款是可强制执行的）
o Facts
• 索赔人L ' estrange签订合同，从被告Graucob那里购买一个香烟老虎机，该协议包括一项明确条款，称“本
协议包含我同意购买上述机器的所有条款和条件，以及任何明示或默示的条件、声明或保证，在此不包括法
定的或其他未说明的。这台机器被证明是有缺陷的，因此原告L ' estrange对被告Graucob提起诉讼，声称这
台机器不具备可销售的质量，违反了《商品销售法》。被告Graucob声称，明文条款使规约变得无关紧要，
而且他没有违反他们所达成的协议。索赔人L ' estrange回答说，她不知道这一条款，因为她没有正确阅读协
议，它不应该适用。
o Issue
• 合同中未规定的所有条款的条款是否应视为有效和有约束力。
o Decision/Outcome
• 上诉法院作出了有利于被告Graucob的判决，裁定合同的明示条款具有约束力，并有效地排除了法定销售条
款的相关性。此外，索赔人L ' estrange没有正确阅读合同的事实并不影响合同的有效性，因为在签署合同
时，她同意受合同内容的约束。值得注意的是 ，本案强调了法院对合同神圣性的尊重。
案例来源： https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/lestrange-v-graucob.php
考点5.2 Express Terms 明示条款
16. Olley v Marlborough Court
合同签订之后，才提醒注意的新条款，不受到合同法的保护
o Facts
• Olley住酒店，衣服在酒店里被偷了，旅馆看门人没有注意到有人进去偷东西，旅馆说有disclaimers对丢失
物品不负责，因为合同是在接待时订立的，而声称免责的通知是在合同成立后客人Olley进入卧室时才可见
的。
o Decision/Outcome
• 上诉法院驳回了马尔伯勒法院有限公司的上诉。首先，他们认为酒店存在疏忽，他们的疏忽给顾客造成了合
理的可预见的损害。第二，通知不能成为合同的一部分，因为双方之间的合同已经在前台确立，当Olley夫
人付款并收到房间钥匙时。那时，奥利太太不可能注意到陈列在她房间里的布告。最后，该条款的条款不够
明确，法院无法生效。因此，在Olley v Marlborough Court Ltd案的最终判决中，Olley夫人对外套的索赔获
得了成功。
o 总结：原告O的衣服丢了，酒店的免责声明是在入住后才看到的，原告O可以索赔。
o
Best Idea: Always write express terms in the contract before signing, because there is a problem with relying on oral express terms – the Parole
Evidence Rule.
o
o 在签订合同之前一定要写明确的条款，因为依靠口头明确条款——口头证据规则——是有问题的。（生活小建议）
案例来源： https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/olley-v-marlborough-court-hotel.php
考点5.2.1 Parol Evidence Rule 口头证据规则
o If a contract is in writing, normally the courts will favour the written terms, and disregard any verbal
representation or verbal promise (a verbal term) made outside of the written terms and not allow any
verbal evidence which contradicts the written terms of the contract
o 如果是书面合同,通常情况下,法院将支持的书面条款, ,无视口头承诺或任何口头表示和不允许任何与合
同的书面条款相矛盾的口头证据。
考点5.2.1 Parol Evidence Rule 口头证据规则
However, the promise may still be enforceable if the other party can establish that the broken
promise was: 然而，如果另一方能够确定违约的承诺是一下情况，与合同条款相矛盾的证据可获得支
持
Ø 1. Breach of a collateral contract; 违反附带合同
Ø 2. **In the case of a false representation – a Misrepresentation – Topic on Contract 2; or在虚
假陈述的情况下（W3）或
如果⼀⽅的⼝头承诺是诱导你签订合同，可终⽌合同，索要赔偿视情况
Ø 3. Breach of the ACL – Topic on Consumer and Competition Law. 违反ACL -消费者与竞争法专
题。（W5）
考点5.2.1.1 Collateral Contract 附属合同（了解即可）
o Collateral Contract - a promise that forms a small pre-existing contract, which enables the
main written contract to come into existence - If the promise is not true, the innocent party
can sue for breach of collateral contract.
o 附属合同-形成一个预先存在的小合同的承诺，它使主要的书面合同得以存在-如果承诺不真实，无辜
的一方可以起诉违反附属合同。
考点5.2.1.1 Collateral Contract 附属合同（了解即
可）
Elements required for collateral contract: 附属合同要求的要素:
q There is a wri-en contract, a verbal statement that is made before entry into the wri-en contract and which is a term;
• 有书面合同，即在订立书面合同前作出的有期限的口头声明;
q The statement must not be inconsistent with the wri-en contract; 声明不得与书面合同不一致;
q The statement must have been promissory, intended as a promise to induce entry into the wri-en contract;
• 该声明必须是具有约束力的，意图促使签订书面合同的承诺;
q There must be separate considera:on for the collateral contract. The considera:on for the collateral contract is the entry
into the wri-en contract.
• 附属合同必须有单独的对价considera:on。附属合同的对价是书面合同的订立。
q Example – 14. De Lasalle v Guildford (1901) – drains. No wri-en contract.（原告D租了被告G的房子，被告G欺骗原告D房
子下水道状况，口头承诺和租房合同不符，原告D可索要赔偿。）
考点5.2.2 Express Terms – Conditions and Warranties
明示条款-条件和保证
Condition:
o A term that vital or essential to the operation of the contract - if a condition is not performed then the
contract is so substantially different that it in effect it cannot be performed at all – the innocent party
can terminate the contract and sue for damages.
o 条件:一个对合同的运作至关重要或至关重要的条款-如果一个条件没有履行，那么合同就会有很大的
不同，实际上它根本不能履行-无辜的一方可以终止合同并要求赔偿损失。
Warranties:
o Terms that are less important and if breached will only entitle the innocent party to sue for damages,
not to terminate the contract.
o 保证:不太重要的条款，如果被违反，将只会使无辜的一方有权要求赔偿，而不是终止合同。
考点5.2.2 Express Terms – Conditions and Warranties
明示条款-条件和保证
17. Bettini v Gye (1876) – opera singer （Warranties）
o Facts
•
condition：演出
warranties：彩排到达时间
原告Bettini与被告Gye成了一项协议。协议的条款是，在1875年1月1日至1875年12月1日期间，
Bettini不得在伦敦50英里范围内的任何地点演出，除了意大利皇家歌剧院科文特花园。此外，在
1875年3月30日至1875年7月13日期间，Bettini每月为Gye演出150英镑。协议还规定，Bettini必须
在彩排前6天抵达伦敦。然而，Bettini在他的表演期开始前两天到达。但是Gye拒绝了他的演出
o Decision/Outcome
•
“Bettini必须在彩排前6天抵达伦敦”这一要求不等于condition，而是一种保证Warranties，这意味
着原告Gye不能在此基础上终止合同，只能在损害赔偿中提起诉讼。
案例来源：https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/bettini-v-gye.php
考点5.2.2 Express Terms – Conditions and Warranties
明示条款-条件和保证
18. Associated Newspapers v Bancks (1951)
o Test of Essentiality: Whether the statement is of such importance to the innocent party that it would not have
entered into the contract unless the promise by the defendant was made 重要性的测试：该声明对无辜方是否
如此重要，以至于除非被告做出承诺，否则不会签订合同 （Condition）
o Facts
• 原告Associated Newspapers与被告人Bancks订约绘制一幅漫画，每周在报纸的头版完整刊登。原告
Associated Newspapers并非总是在头版刊登该漫画。被告Bancks表示，原告人Associated Newspapers违
反了合约，因此他将终止合约。原告Associated Newspapers辩称在头版显示并非必要条款condition。
o Issue：在头版展示漫画的义务是否是一项基本条款，合同是否被驳回？condition or warranties？
o Decision/Outcome
• 在首页上显示漫画是一种condition，而不是warranty。 The Plaintiff has three obligations under the
contract: 1) to display the comic, 2) on the front page, 3) every week. 原告人根据合约有三项义务：1）展示
漫画，2）在头版，3）每周展示。
• 原告Associated Newspapers违反了第2条，這是一个根本条款。被告人Bancks有权终止合约。
考点5.3 Implied Terms 默示条款（了解即可）
Common Law - The courts can imply a term into a contract if the following tests are satisfied –
quite difficult to establish: 普通法：法院可以在满足以下标准的情况下，将合同条款确定为默示条款
（通常很难确定）:
o The implied term must be reasonable, equitable and fair; 默示条款必须合理、公正、公平;
o It must be necessary to give business efficacy to the contract – to make it viable;
•
必须使合同具有商业效力——使其可行;
o It must be so obvious that it goes without saying; 它必须如此明显，不言而喻;
o It must be capable of clear expression; 它必须能够清楚地表达;
o It must not contradict any express term of the contract – it must be consistent with the express
terms, not against any. 它不能与合同的任何明示条款相抵触——它必须与明示条款相一致，而不是与
任何明示条款相抵触。
考点5.3 Implied Terms 默示条款（了解即可）
o Terms can be easily implied if such terms are statutory terms, or a normal part of custom or industry trade
usage, or if there has been a history of prior dealings
•
如果这些条款是法定条款，或者是习惯或行业贸易惯例的正常部分，或者如果以前有过交易的历
史，那么这些条款很容易为默示条款。
o the Court will infer that the customer has the knowledge of the term and be bound in the present
contract.
• 法院将推断客户已了解该条款并受本合同的约束。
19. Balmain v Robertson (1906)
o 进入或离开码头时必须支付一便士的费用。无论旅客是否乘渡船旅行，本规则均不例外。
考点5.4 Disclaimers免责声明（了解即可）
It is dangerous to sign a written contract without first reading the terms - Why? Contracts often include
disclaimers. 在没有先阅读条款的情况下签署书面合同是危险的—— 因为合同通常包括免责声明。
o A disclaimer is a term of the contract that either limits, excludes or restricts the liability of one party for
either breach of contract or liability for negligence in a contract
o 免责声明是限制、排除或限制一方在合同中的违约责任或过失责任的合同条款
Ø 15. L’Estrange v Graucob（原告L没有读合同而签字，合同条款是可强制执行的，免责声明排除了被告的责
任）
Ø 16. Olley v Marlborough. （原告O的衣服丢了，酒店的免责声明是在入住后才看到的，原告O可以索赔。）
考点5.4 Disclaimers免责声明（了解即可）
A disclaimer will be a term of the contract if it is included in a signed written contract; or it was brought
to the other party’s attention by reasonable notice before the contract was formed; or it is implied into
the contract.
•
免责声明将是合同的条款：如果免责声明包含在已签署的书面合同中；或者在订立合同之前，以合理
的通知通知对方的;或者是在合同中隐含的。
•
But what happens if the disclaimer is misrepresented? –免责声明被曲解告知，可获得赔偿。
17. Curtis v Chemical Cleaning [1951]
• Curtis签署了disclaimer，店员只告诉了部分disclaimer的内容，Curtis的衣服被洗坏了，洗衣店说有免责条款。申
请人的上诉法院发现,观看,而一方通常是受所有签署书面合同的内容,即使他们没有正确地阅读合同,条款不应被视
为具有法律效力,起草方歪曲了一项条款,另一方的影响。因此，免除责任条款被认为没有适当地纳入合同，索赔
人得到赔偿。
• 案例来源： https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/curtis-v-chemical-cleaning-and-dyeing.php
重难点总结：考点5. Terms of a Contract 合同条款
W3
知识点1 Vitiating Factors⭐
知识点2 Ending a contract⭐
知识点3 Damages ⭐
知识点4 Frustration⭐
W3
知识点讲解
W3 Enforcing Contracts
Two Important Principles of Contract Law:
1) Caveat Emptor – let the buyer beware – Buyer must make their own inquiries as to buying goods and
services – by entering into the contract means that the Buyer accepted all risks;
• 买方当心 – 买方必须自行查询购买商品和服务 – 签订合同意味着买方接受所有风险；
2) Freedom of Contract – when people enter into contacts it must bewith their free, voluntary and
genuineconsent – that they agreed to accept all the risks
• 合同自由——当人们建立联系时，必须在他们自由、自愿和真正同意的情况下——他们同
意接受所有风险
考点1. Vi2a2ng Factors 无效因素
Factors that affect or go against free, voluntary and genuine contractual consent are called viJaJng factors.
影响或违背自由、自愿和真正的合同同意的因素称为“无效因素”。
ViJaJng factors会导致以下两种无效模式（根据不同因素有不同的无效方式）（注意区分）
Ø
Void - no contractual effect. 无效——无合同效力。
Ø
Voidable - capable of being either set aside – termina_ng the contract - or confirmed – con_nuing with
the contract - at the op_on of one party to it (the innocent party). 可作废 - 可以被搁置 - 终止合同 或确认 - 继续合同 - 由其中一方（无辜方）选择。
考点1. Vi2a2ng Factors 无效因素框架
考点1.1 Mistake
o A mistake occurs when one or more of the parJes to a contract misunderstand each other about
a fundamental fact in relaJon to the contract.
•
当合同的一方或多方对与合同有关的基本事实相互误解时，就会发生错误。
o Generally, if a party has made a mistake, it does NOT enJtle them to terminate the contract under
caveat emptor.
•
一般而言，如果一方当事人犯了错误，则无权根据警告终止合同。
考点1.1 Mistake
•
But, if a mistake occurred prior to or at the Jme of entry into the contract and about a fundamental
fact, then 3 excepJons could apply to make the contract void at common law/voidable at equity.
•
但是，如果在签订合同之前或签订合同之时以及关于基本事实的错误发生，则可以适用 3 种例外
情况使合同在普通法下无效void/在衡平法下无效voidable。
考点1.1 Mistake - Common mistake
1. Common mistake: shared mistake – both parJes make the same mistake as to a fundamental
fact/aspect of the contract.
•
共同错误：共同错误——双方在合同的基本事实/方面犯了同样的错误。
1. Leaf v Interna9onal Galleries (1950)
•
原告A在B那里买了一幅画，B以为是J. Constable画的，5年后A出售这幅画发现并不是J画的。原告
A的索赔失败了，因为从签订合同到想要解除合同已经过去了很长一段时间。
•
法院认为，虽然有关画家的错误是根本性的，但还没有严重到使合同无效的程度。在此基础上，
原告的主张失败了。
•
案例来源：h"ps://www.lawteacher.net/cases/leaf-v-interna4onal-galleries.php
考点1.1 Mistake - Mutual mistake
2. Mutual mistake: both parJes think they have an agreement but both parJes misunderstand each
other and make different mistakes as to a fundamental fact.
• 相互错误：双方都认为他们达成了协议，但双方相互误解并在一个基本事实上犯了不同的错误。
2. Raffles v Wichelhaus (1864)
o Raffles向Wichelhaus出售棉花，有两艘一样名字的船运输棉花，Raffles说的是12月离开的船，Wichelhaus以为
是10月离开的船，导致棉花在wichelhaus认为的时间晚到了。
o 法院认为，原告与被告之间的合同不可强制执行。在讨论合同时，Peerless 和所指的船都存在歧义，也没有
就销售条款达成一致。双方之间没有达成一致意见或意见一致以形成具有约束力的合同。客观测试清楚地表
明，一个有理智的人无法肯定地确定商定的是哪艘船。
o It was held that the contract between the complainant and defendant was not enforceable.
• 原告与被告之间的合同被裁定为不可执行
o
案例来源：h"ps://www.lawteacher.net/cases/raffles-v-wichelhaus.php
考点1.1 Mistake - Unilateral mistake
3. Unilateral mistake: one party makes a mistake as to the terms or effect of the contract or to the idenJty of
the other party. The mistake relates to a fundamental aspect of the contract. The other party knows/ought
to be aware of the mistake made by the innocent party.
•
单方面错误：该错误涉及合同的一个基本方面。另一方知道或应该知道无辜方所犯的错误。
3. Taylor v Johnson (1983)
o Fact：Johnson 卖地给Taylor，Johnson 说以$15000价格将10英亩土地卖给Taylor，Taylor知道这个价格十分优惠，没有说出问题所
在。Johnson以为他说的是$15000每亩出售这个地，但合同上写的是$15000价格10英亩土地。
o Issue: Johnson的错误可以作为放弃合同的理由吗?
o Decision: 在这种情况下，合同应该搁置。
o Reason: 这是单方面的错误，单凭这一点并不意味着合同无效。然而,如果合同一方进入下一个严重的错误在一个基本项,合同将
无效,如果对方知道情况表明第一方是错误的,并故意将确保甲方不会发现他们的错误直到为时已晚。在这种情况下，故意忽视
标志并为防止发现错误而采取行动的一方，要求有错误的一方遵守合同是违背良心的。法院认定Taylor就是这样做的。
o
案例来源：h"p://www.alcware.com/fpbldemo/Cases/taylor.htm
总结：考点1.1 3种Mistake
考点1.2 Duress胁迫
Under contract law, duress occurs if one party compels the other party to enter into the contract by threatening
nega8ve consequences - they are said to have engaged in duress and the contract is voidable.
根据合同法，如果一方以消极后果相威胁迫使另一方签订合同，就会发生胁迫——他们被认为是受到胁迫，
合同是可撤销的voidable。
考点1.2 Duress胁迫
1. To the personal safety of the other party or to that of their loved ones
为对方或他们所爱的人的人身安全
o 4. Barton v Armstrong;
•
Barton 和 Armstrong是公司的大股东，经过一次会谈，双方同意Barton将购买Armstrong的股份，起草了一份协议，并执
行了。
•
Barton声称他是被迫购买Armstrong的股份的，Armstrong曾威胁说，如果他不购买股份，就要谋杀他。
•
Barton的上诉被允许了。
•
案例来源：h8ps://www.lawteacher.net/cases/alexander-barton-v-armstrong.php
2. To the safety of the other party’s goods or property, or
对另一方货物或财产的安全
考点1.2 Duress胁迫
3. To the other party’s economic or financial wellbeing, known as economic duress.
对另一方的经济或财政福祉，即所谓的经济胁迫
o 5. Universe Tankships v InternaJonal Transport Workers Union
• Interna:onal Transport Workers' Federa:on将Universe Tankship Inc.的一艘船列入贸易争端的黑名单。
为了确保这艘船的释放，Universe Tankships Inc.向ITWF的福利基金支付了$6,480。
• ITWF承认这是在胁迫下达成的协议。
•
案例来源：h"ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe_Tankships_Inc._of_Monrovia_v._Interna@onal_Transport_Workers%27_Federa@on
总结：考点1.2 Duress胁迫
考点1.3 Under Influence 不正当影响
• Undue influence occurs where a person with influence and power dominates the will of another person. If one party
has influence over the other party and they take advantage of that influence such that the other party is not really
exercising their independent judgement, the contract will be voidable on the grounds of undue influence.
• 当一个有影响力和权力的人支配另一个人的意志时，就会产生不正当的影响。如果一方对另一方施加影响，并
利用这种影响使另一方不能真正行使独立判断，则合同将因施加不当影响而可撤销voidable。
6. Bank v Mueller (1925)
• 妻子在丈夫的压力下向银行作出的担保中获得救济。
•
案例来源：h8ps://victorianreports.com.au/judgment/1925-VLR-642
考点1.3 Under Influence 不正当影响
Undue influence will be presumed where the contract is between:
Ø
doctor and paJent,
Ø
lawyer and client,
Ø
trustee and beneficiary,受托人和受益人
Ø
parent/guardian and child, or
Ø
religious leader and follower.宗教领袖和追随者
总结：考点1.3 Under Influence 不正当影响
考点1.4 Misrepresenta2on 虚假陈述
§ A statement that is materially misleading – A false statement of fact is made by one party
to another.
§ 具有重大误导性的陈述：一方对另一方作出虚假的事实陈述。
Ø if the other party was induced to enter into the contract by that false statement of fact the contract is then voidable.
•
如果另一方是被虚假的事实陈述所诱导而签订合同的，那么合同就可撤销voidable。
Ø Even though an untrue mere representa<on is not an enforceable term, if a mere
representa<on sa<sfies the following tests for misrepresenta<on, it will be ac<onable.
•
即使不真实的纯粹陈述不是一个可强制执行的条款，但如果不真实的纯粹陈述满足以下对虚假陈
述的检验，则为虚假陈述。
考点1.4 Misrepresenta2on 虚假陈述
Elements for a MisrepresentaFon:
o
A false statement of fact is made by the representor to the representee;
• 代表人向被代表人作出虚假的事实陈述;
o
With regard to an exis_ng fact or past event – not statements of future inten_on;
• 陈述是关于已存在的事实或过去的事件-不是关于未来意图的;
o
Before or at the _me the contract is concluded;
• 做出该陈述是在订立合同之前或者订立合同时;
o
Intended to induce and in fact does induce, the other party to enter into the contract.
• 做出该陈述的意图是引诱并且事实上确实引诱对方订立合同。
考点1.4.1 Not constitute misrepresentation 不构成虚假陈述的情形
Misrepresentation does not include:
1) Honest statements of opinion; 诚实陈述意见
2) Exaggera:ons - oYen found 夸张
•
-- in adver:sing “Toyota – Oh What a Feeling”:
3) Statements of future inten:on; 关于未来
4) Statements that do not meet the elements for misrepresenta:on. 不符合错误表述元素的语句
5) Staying silent - unless excep:ons apply: 保持沉默——除非有例外
• A statement, previously truthful, subsequently becomes untrue and the representor does not correct it aYer
discovering it is untrue.
• 一项先前是真实的陈述，随后就变成不真实的，而陈述者在发现该陈述不真实后也没有予以更正。
• There is a legal obliga:on of full disclosure by par:es during nego:a:ons.
• 在谈判过程中，各方有法律义务全面披露信息。
总结：考点1.4.1 Not consCtute misrepresentaCon 不构成虚假陈述的情形
考点1.4.2 Fraudulent Misrepresenta2on 欺诈性的虚假陈述
Fraudulent misrepresentaJon: The representor knows or believes that the statement is untrue and presents it
to be true or accurate with the aim of making the other party enter into the contract.
欺诈性的虚假陈述:代表人知道或相信该陈述不真实，并为使另一方订立合同而将该陈述陈述为真实或
准确的。
The elements of fraudulent misrepresentaJon are as follows:
Ø A false statement of fact is made by one party to the other; 一方向另一方作出虚假事实陈述的.
Ø The statement is made knowingly, with a lack of belief in its truth or recklessly; 该陈述是在知情的情况下
做出的.
Ø The statement induces the other party to enter into the contract; 该陈述诱使对方订立合同.
Ø The statement results in damage to the innocent party. 陈述会给无辜的一方造成损害.
Remedy for Fraudulent MisrepresentaJon: The innocent party may set aside - terminate - the contract and
sue for damages.
欺诈性错误陈述的补救措施:无辜的一方可以搁置并终止合同，并起诉索赔。
总结：考点1.4.2 Fraudulent Misrepresenta2on 欺诈性的虚假陈述
考点1.4.3 Innocent Misrepresenta2on 无辜的错误陈述
Innocent misrepresenta9on: The statement is incorrect but made in good faith – the defendant
honestly thought what they said/wrote was true.
•
无辜的错误陈述:该陈述不正确，但出于善意——被告诚实地认为他们所说/所写的是真实的。
The elements of innocent misrepresenta9on are:
Ø
Ø
When the representor does not intend to deceive anyone. 当陈述者无意欺骗任何人时
The misrepresenta=on is made uninten=onally. 错误陈述是无意的
Remedy for Innocent Misrepresenta9on: The innocent party may set aside- terminate - the
contract, but cannot sue for damages.
•
无辜错误陈述的补救措施: 无辜的一方可以搁置-终止合同，但不能提起损害赔偿诉讼。
总结：考点1.4.3 Innocent Misrepresenta2on 无辜的错误陈述
考点1.4.4 Negligent Misrepresenta2on 疏忽的错误陈述
Negligent MisrepresentaJon: The representor makes an honest but incorrect statement negligently and
carelessly.
疏忽的错误陈述: 陈述者由于疏忽大意，做出了诚实但不正确的陈述。
The elements of negligent misrepresentaJon are:
o A rela_onship/special posi_on exists between par_es such that the person providing the informa_on or
advice must exercise a duty of care; 双方之间存在关系/特殊地位，提供资料或意见的人必须行使注
意义务；
o Subject macer is of a serious or business nature; 事件性质是严重的或商业的；
o Person providing the advice realizes that the recipient intends to act upon that advice or informa_on; 提
供意见的人意识到接受者打算根据该意见或信息采取行动；
o It was reasonable for recipient to rely on the advice or informa_on; and 接受者信赖有关意见或资料是
合理的;
o Damage was suffered by the recipient, usually monetary loss. 接受意见的人遭受的损害，通常是金钱
损失。
考点1.4.4 Negligent Misrepresenta2on 疏忽的错误陈述
7. San Sebas9an v Minister – No=ce of proposed redevelopment。
Ø 悉尼市议会通过了一项计划，根据国家规划局编写的计划和文件重新开发Woolloomooloo。 开发商
依靠计划文件中的所谓陈述，购买了Woolloomooloo的土地，希望其有利可图的重建。当该计划被放
弃时，土地失去了价值，要么被强制收购，要么亏本出售。开发商要求理事会和管理局赔偿因依赖
计划文件中的陈述而遭受的损失，他们声称这些陈述是疏忽的，以及他们没有警告该计划可能被放
弃。
Ø 案例来源：h8p://lawstudies.wikidot.com/sansebasOanvminister-2010
Remedy for Negligent Misrepresenta9on: The innocent party may set aside - terminate - the
contract and sue for damages.
• 因疏忽造成的错误陈述的补救措施:无辜的一方可以搁置终止合同，并起诉索赔。
总结：考点1.4.4 Negligent Misrepresenta2on疏忽的错误陈述
重难点总结-考点1.4 Misrepresenta2on 错误陈述
考点1.5 Unconscionable Conduct 不合情理的行为
A contract will be void due to unconscionable conduct if one party has unfairly taken advantage of a special
weakness or disadvantage on the part of the other party.
•
如果一方不公平地利用另一方的特殊弱点或劣势，则合同将因不合理的行为而无效void。
8. Commercial Bank v Amadio (1983)
• 银行知道Amadio的儿子经济状况不好，没有告知Amadio，还让Amadio为儿子担保。The Full Court held that the
silence from the bank in these circumstances meant the transac:on was unconscionable and it was set aside. 全院认
为，银行在这些情况下保持沉默意味着该交易是不合理的，因此该交易被搁置。
•
案例来源：h"ps: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Bank_of_Australia_Ltd_v_Amadio
考点1.5 Unconscionable Conduct不合情理的⾏为
The weaker party was in a position of special disability (such as poverty, sickness, age, sex,
Ø
drunkenness, illiteracy, lack of education, emotional dependence - although this list is not
exhaustive), and is specially disadvantaged – something that seriously affects the ability of a
party to judge their own best interests;
•
较弱的一方是在一个特殊的残疾的位置(如贫困、疾病、年龄、性别、醉酒、文盲、缺乏教育,情感依
赖——尽管这个列表不是详尽的),并特别弱势群体——这严重影响当事人的能力来判断自己的最佳利
益;
Ø
The stronger party knew about (or should have known about) the weaker party’s special
disability.
• 实力较强的一方知道(或应该知道)弱势一方的特殊缺陷。
Ø
The stronger party took an unfair advantage of the weaker party’s special disability.
• 较强的一方不公平地利用了较弱一方的特殊缺陷。
总结：考点1.5 Unconscionable Conduct 不合情理的⾏为
重难点总结- 考点1 Vi2a2ng Factors无效因素
考点2. Laws for Ending a Contract
The Best Way: Performance – each party fully performs their promises and obliga_ons under the contract.
• 最佳方式:履约-每一方完全履行其在合同下的承诺和义务。
The Worst Way: Breaching a term of the contract: 最糟糕的方式:违反合同条款:
Ø
Consequences depend on whether the term was a condiJon or a warranty;
• 结果取决于该条款是条件condi_on还是保证warranty（W2）
Remedies include Termina_on or Recission; Damages, Equitable remedies – injunc_on/specific
performance; Statutory remedies – ACL.
• 补救措施包括终止或解除;损害赔偿，衡平法上的救济-强制令/强制履行;法定救济- ACL。
考点2. Laws for Ending a Contract
Par_es can also agree to end the contract by releasing the other from future obliga_ons such as:
双方还可以同意终止合同，解除对方未来的义务，如:
Ø
A party who has already performed their own obliga_ons can unilaterally release the other party from
complete performance of their obliga_ons; or
已经履行自己义务的一方，可以单方面免除对方完全履行义务;或
Ø
Par_es can mutually agree to release each-other or to replace the exis_ng agreement with a new
agreement.
双方可同意彼此解除协议或以新协议取代现有协议。
总结：考点2. Laws for Ending a Contract
考点3. Damages损害赔偿
Damages – financial compensa8on for the innocent party’s losses as a result of the other par8es breach of contract –
they are recoverable where:
损害赔偿：因其他方违约从而造成的无辜方损失的经济赔偿，可在以下情况下获得:
Ø
The loss arose naturally from the breach of the contract (in the normal course of business); or
• (在正常经营过程中)因违约而自然产生的损失;或
Ø
The loss was actually contemplated by the defendant as a probable result of their breach of the contract (knew about
the special circumstance at the :me of entering into the contract)
•
(在订立合同时知道特殊情况)被告（非无辜的一方）实际预料到损失可能是其违约造成的损失。
考点3. Damages损害赔偿
9. Hadley v Baxendale (1854) – transpor8ng crankshaU – defendant not told about risk of delay运输曲轴：—被告没有
被告知延迟的风险
案例来源：h8ps://www.lawteacher.net/cases/hadley-v-baxendale.php
•
Facts: Baxendale将曲轴运送到需要修理的地方, 然后再运送回来, 导致曲轴比约定的时间晚了一周归还给原告,
在此期间, 原告的工厂停止了运转。Hadley原告辩称，Baxendale被告表现出专业疏忽，并企图申索因意外关闭
一周而造成的利润损失。
•
Issue: Whether the loss of profits resultant from the mill’s closure was too remote for the claimant to be able to
claim. 工厂关闭造成的利润损失是否太遥远，索赔人无法索赔？
•
Held: 法院判决，认为只有在合理地认为损失是由违约自然造成的情况下，一方当事人才能成功地要求赔偿
因违约而造成的损失，或者当事人在订立合同时就应当合理地预料到违约会造成损失的情况。由于Baxendale
没有合理地预见到拖延的后果，Hadley也没有通知Baxendale，Baxendale对工厂的利润损失不负责。
考点3. Damages损害赔偿-Remoteness of Loss: 损失的遥远性
Remoteness of Loss: 损失的遥远性
Ø
10. Victoria Laundry v Newman (1949) – defendant aware of need for urgent delivery of boiler for performing
usual/normal work – but defendant not told about special dyeing work
§ 被告N知道需要紧急运送锅炉以进行正常工作，也知道原告V的特殊的染色工作；原告V索要赔偿成功。
§ 案例来源：h8ps://www.lawteacher.net/cases/victoria-laundry-v-newman-industries.php
§ Fact：Victoria Laundry从Newman Industries订购了一台大型锅炉，考虑一些有利可图的染色合同。Newman
Industries知道Victoria Laundry的业务性质，并打算尽快将锅炉投入使用。Newman Industries将锅炉延期5个
月交货，Victoria Laundry声称违约。
§ Held：VLL成功挽回了损失的利润。NIL知道VLL的业务需要锅炉，还承诺在特定日期交付。
考点3. Damages损害赔偿 - Mi2ga2on of Damages: 减轻损害
Mi8ga8on of Damages: 减轻损害
•
The party seeking damages cannot just sit and wait for the ac:on to be brought to court – they are under an
obliga:on to take reasonable steps to mi:gate – to reduce - their loss.
•
Ø
寻求损害赔偿的一方不能坐等诉讼被提交法庭——他们有义务采取合理的步骤来减轻他们的损失。
11. Payzu v Saunders (1919)
• Fact：被告S须按月向原告P交付货物，原告P须在交付货物后一个月内支付货款。原告P以折扣价收到货物，
因为他承诺在9个月期间向供应商购买。原告P未能及时支付第一批款项(这相当于违反了保证，被告无权拒
绝履行合同)。被告S拒绝继续履行原来的合约，但被告S告诉原告P，若原告P在交货时付现款，他便会在日
后交付货物，并仍会以折扣价将货物交付给他。原告P拒绝了这个提议，并以更高的价格从别处购买了货物
。然后，原告P起诉被告S，要求赔偿合同约定的价格和他实际支付的价格之间的差额。
• Held：原告P无权获得损害赔偿。原告P有机会以折扣价购买，但原告P拒绝了。原告P有责任采取合理的措
施来减少损失。
总结：考点3. Damages损害赔偿
考点4. Frustra2on 意外
A contract will be terminated for frustra8on if: 如果出现以下这样的意外，合同将被终止:
v
A supervening event makes performance of the contract either completely impossible or at least impossible to
perform in the original way envisaged;
• 突发事件使合同的履行完全不可能或至少不可能以最初设想的方式履行；
v
Neither party caused the supervening event;
• 双方都没有造成这一意外事件;
v
The contract did not provide for the supervening event, either expressly or by implica:on; and
• 合同没有明示或暗示地规定先前事件，并且
v
It would be unjust to compel either party to proceed with the contract.
• 合同没有对意外事件作出规定。强迫任何一方继续履行合同都是不公正的。
考点4. Frustra2on 意外
12. Krell v Henry (1903) – ren8ng apartment to see the Kings corona8on procession;
租公寓看国王加冕游行; （房东/原告K败诉，合同无法履行）
案例来源：h-ps://www.lawteacher.net/cases/krell-v-henry.php
Ø
Fact：被告H同意于6月26日和27日在蓓尔美尔租一套公寓，在这一天宣布将举行加冕游行并经过蓓尔美尔。
该合约并无明示有关加冕仪式或出租公寓的任何其他用途。被告H在签订合同时支付了订金。然而，游行并
没有在宣布的日期举行。因此，被告H拒绝支付约定租金的余款。
Ø
Issue：尽管游行没有按计划进行，被告H是否仍须缴付租金?
Ø
Decision：因为双方承认，他们认为在最初确定的日期举行加冕游行是合同的基础，被告H须就所列日期缴付
单位使用费的义务，并没有考虑到游行可能不会进行。原告K无权追回合同规定的租金余额。
考点4. Frustra2on 意外
13. Herne v Huaon (1903) – ren8ng steamboat to see naval review, the King and cruise around the bay
租汽船看海军检阅，国王和围绕海湾巡航（原告胜诉，合同履行）
Ø
Fact：被告Hu-on于1903年6月28日和29日租用一艘名为Cynthia的轮船。以便将乘客从 HerneBay海军审查和舰
队周围一天的巡航。这需要支付特定的押金和租金。协议签订后，被告支付了定金。 6月25日，审查被取消。
原告Herne联系被告并告知他该船已准备好启动并要求付款。原告没有收到任何答复，因此决定于 6 月 28 日
至 29 日将该船用于自己的目的，并从中获利。
6 月 29 日，被告Hu-on全部拒付合同。原告Herne对被告Hu-on提起诉讼，以收回租金减去他们在两天内
使用该船所获得的利润后的余额。
Ø
Issue：尽管皇家海军审查被取消，原告Herne是否有权收回这两天的租金？
Ø
Decision：该决定有利于原告Herne。(1)风险由被告Hu-on承担；(2) 进行皇家海军审查并不是合同的唯一依据
，因此合同没有完全破坏。
案例来源：h8ps://www.lawteacher.net/cases/herne-bay-steam-boat-v-hu8on.php
考点4. Frustra2on 意外
14. Codelfa v State (1982) – drilling road tunnel under residences houses 24hours/6 days a week to meet project deadlines
- reduced drilling hours because of injunc:on – unable to meet deadlines – liable to penalty payments.
为了满足项目最后期限，每周24小时/6天在居民住宅下面钻探公路隧道-由于禁令减少了钻探时间-无法满足最
后期限-必须支付罚款。（原告胜诉，获得赔偿）
Ø
Facts: 新南威尔士州国家铁路局(State Rail Authority of New South Wales)与Codelfa Construc:on签订了一份合同
，为悉尼新的东郊铁路线挖掘隧道。根据合同，这些工作将在130周内完成，因此Codelfa立即开始工作，每天
24小时，每周7天。在收到有关施工噪音的投诉和诉讼后，Codelfa被授予了每周6天每天挖掘16小时的禁令。
Codelfa要求管理局就损失的利润和产生的额外费用向其支付额外款项.
Ø
Held: 法院认为，确实发现该合同因禁令injunc:ons而受挫frustrated ，尽管考虑到谈判的周围环境是合法的(
即，双方都认为工程将是24/7的，State将在禁令的情况下赔偿Codelfa。
案例来源：h5ps://www.survivelaw.com/post/codelfa-construc;on-pty-ltd-v-state-rail-authority-of-nsw-1982-149-clr-337#:~:text=3%20min,Codelfa%20Construc;on%20Pty%20Ltd%20v%20State%20Rail,NSW%20(1982)%20149%20CLR%20337&text=Facts%3B%20The%20State%20Rail%20Authority,Suburb's%20railway%20li
ne%20in%20Sydney
总结：考点4. Frustra2on 意外
重难点总结
重难点总结-W3 Enforcing a contract
重难点总结-W3 Enforcing a contract
重难点总结-W3 Enforcing a contract
经典题型放送
经典题型练习(根据往届Assignment题⺫改编）
A在昆州布里斯班销售女装
B在悉尼制造成衣以及海外进口服装
A是B的表姐
A和B在1990年从法国移民到澳洲，双方都在服装行业却得了成功，并且都有很好的英语交流能力和
阅读能力
2024年1月20号
A打电话给B：
1.想要100%纯W面料制作的西装，不想要M面料制作的，因为W面料穿起来凉爽。
2.我还想要S国或者澳洲制造的西装，因为这两个国家制造的质量很好。我的顾客会很喜欢的！
B：没问题，我认识S国的制造商，他可以提供100%纯W面料制作的西装。我也可以提供澳洲制作的
100%纯W面料制作的西装。我都可以卖给你。
A：那太好了，你让你的律师起草合同吧！
B：好的
经典题型练习(根据往届Assignment题⺫改编）
2024年2月10号
B的律师拟定好了合同，B读后十分满意，发给了A。
合同条款其中的两项条款：
1.80%的西装由S国制造的100%纯W面料，20%的西装由澳洲制造的100%纯W面料。
2.合同签订之日起三个月内，要在交付前支付卖方$200,000
3.order liability: 买方和卖方承认并同意，卖方保留更改面料、面料含量、面料一致性和西装设计的
权利，恕不另行通知买方，并且如果发生此类更改，卖方不会对买家承担任何责任”
经典题型练习(根据往届Assignment题⺫改编）
A看到了order liability，问B：order liability这个是关于什么呢？
B：别担心，就是关于如果我晚送货1周到你手里，你不会让我承担任何责任。
A：没事，就算你晚送了，我也不会追责的。
A：我又想起来件事情，我希望西装是单排扣的，非双排扣的，因为单排扣会更凉爽
B：没问题。
关于这件事情没有在合同中补充，A也没有阅读合同，双方签订了合同。
A立马向B支付了$200,000的购买金额。
经典题型练习(根据往届Assignment题⺫改编）
2024年3月20号
A收到了衣服，A发现80%的西装由C国制造的M面料，并且是双排扣的；20%的西装也是M面料，虽然是
单排扣的。
A很生气，找到了B，讲述了这些事情，并要求退款。
B：我也不知道这是在C国制造的，都是西装，有啥问题呢？再说咱俩是家庭成员，法律不会管的。
A：还有我的母语是法语，我很难阅读这份合同，而且我出于信任也没读这个合同，你这个骗子。
B：那是你自己的问题。
用Contract Law为双方辩论。(Do NOT write about the Laws of Forma_on of Contract and not write about
any Sales of Goods legisla_on and any laws, rules or regula_ons specifically rela_ng to the clothes, fashion
or garment industry).
经典题型放送（W1）
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
• Section 22 (S22) of the Noise Level Prohibition Act 2021 (Cth) (the Act) states:
• “It is a civil offence for any person to install a stereo sound system that can
create sounds of over 85 decibels for commercial or business use”.
• “任何人如安装可发出超过85分贝声音的立体声系统作商业或商业用途，即属民事罪行。”
• Tom invites people to his house for free to dance at loud all night parties where
the SuperWatz plays music at 150 decibels. TOM邀请了朋友，免费来自己家通宵大声唱
歌跳舞（达到了150分贝）
•
邻居们因为不断的噪音不能得到任何放松或睡眠，于是起诉TOM违反了S22。
•
Tom解释自己没有用于商业用途！
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
• Section 22 (S22) of the Noise Level Prohibition Act 2021 (Cth) (the Act) states:
• “It is a civil offence for any person to install a stereo sound system that can
create sounds of over 85 decibels for commercial or business use”.
• “任何人如安装可发出超过85分贝声音的立体声系统作商业或商业用途，即属民事罪行。”
• Tom invites people to his house for free to dance at loud all night parties where
the SuperWatz plays music at 150 decibels. TOM邀请了朋友，免费来自己家通宵大声唱
歌跳舞（达到了150分贝）
•
邻居们因为不断的噪音不能得到任何放松或睡眠，于是起诉TOM违反了S22。
•
Tom解释自己没有用于商业用途！
Application 1: 第一段辩论S22+该条法律内容，邻居neighbor辩论Tom播放的声音超过85分贝
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
• Section 22 (S22) of the Noise Level Prohibition Act 2021 (Cth) (the Act) states:
• “It is a civil offence for any person to install a stereo sound system that can
create sounds of over 85 decibels for commercial or business use”.
• “任何人如安装可发出超过85分贝声音的立体声系统作商业或商业用途，即属民事罪行。”
• Tom invites people to his house for free to dance at loud all night parties where
the SuperWatz plays music at 150 decibels. TOM邀请了朋友，免费来自己家通宵大声唱
歌跳舞（达到了150分贝）
Application 2:第二段辩论Tom（free不等于business）可以运用Fisher v Bell，Bell只是展示刀没
•
邻居们因为不断的噪音不能得到任何放松或睡眠，于是起诉TOM违反了S22。
有买卖。
•
Tom解释自己没有用于商业用途！
•
However, in the case of Fisher v Bell, 概括案例事实. Here, Tom will argue that …
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
The second reading speech made when the Act was first proposed as a
draft bill to federal parliament states that the purpose of the Act was:
“…to stop the harmful effects of loud music on members of the
public because medical research shows any sound over 85 decibels
can cause permanent damage to peoples ears…”
第二次阅读演讲行为时首次提出作为联邦议会草案指出,该法案的目的是:“……停止的
有害影响公众大声的音乐,因为医学研究显示任何超过85分贝的声音可以造成永久性伤
害人民的耳朵……”
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
The second reading speech made when the Act was first proposed as a draft bill to federal parliament states that
the purpose of the Act was: “…to stop the harmful effects of loud music on members of the public because
medical research shows any sound over 85 decibels can cause permanent damage to peoples ears…”
第二次阅读演讲行为时首次提出作为联邦议会草案指出,该法案的目的是:“……停止的有害影响公众大声的音乐,因
为医学研究显示任何超过85分贝的声音可以造成永久性伤害人民的耳朵……”
•
第三段S15AA AIA (Cth), judges must interpret legislation in a way that best achieves the Act’s object or
purpose.法官必须以最能实现法案目标或目的的方式解释立法
•
The second reading speech：该法案目的是保护耳朵听力
•
Neighbor邻居辩论超过了85分贝，参考这点补充内容，Tom的播放音乐并达到150分贝伤害了我们的耳
朵～
•
Under S15AA AIA(Cth), judges must interpret legislation in a way that best achieves the Act’s object or
purpose. Here, neighbors will argue that …
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
The second reading speech made when the Act was first proposed as a
draft bill to federal parliament states that the purpose of the Act was:
“…to stop the harmful effects of loud music on members of the
public because medical research shows any sound over 85 decibels
can cause permanent damage to peoples ears…”
第二次阅读演讲行为时首次提出作为联邦议会草案指出,该法案的目的是:“……停止的
有害影响公众大声的音乐,因为医学研究显示任何超过85分贝的声音可以造成永久性伤
害人民的耳朵……”
经典题型演练（公开练习题）课后作业
• under S15AB AIA (Cth), the court can only refer to the purpose of the legislation set
out in extrinsic material a provision or the words in legislation are ambiguous or
obscure or the words lead to a result that is manifestly absurd or is unreasonable.根
据S15AB AIA (Cth)的规定，法院只能参考外在材料中所列明的立法目的，条文或立法中的词语含意不
清或模糊，或导致明显荒谬或不合理的结果的词语。
• 这里怎么运用进行辩论？谁可以用？
• Smith v Hughes 妓女拉客场所问题案例
• 这里怎么运用进行辩论？谁可以用？
• Conclusion:
• On the balance of probabilities, the court would most likely decide that（勿无
中生有）
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
I：Issue：
Ø Has Tom been liable for breach of S22 under the Rules of Statutory
Interpretation by a stereo sound system to create sounds of over 85
decibels for free or not?
Ø Can the neighbors enforce Tom not to create sounds of over 85
decibels on the basis that Tom is liable for breach of S22 under the
Rules of Statutory Interpretation or not?
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
LA：Laws & Application：
Ø Under Section 22 (S22) of the Noise Level Prohibition Act 2021 (Cth) (the Act)
states, It is a civil offence for any person to install a stereo sound system that can
create sounds of over 85 decibels for commercial or business use. On the facts
here, Tom will argue that Tom created the sound of 150 decibels by a stereo
sound system for free. The sound of 150 decibels created by Tom is much higher
than the standard of Section 22 (S22) of the Noise Level Prohibition Act 2021
(Cth) (the Act) states, but it is not used for commercial or business. So, Tom is not
liable for breach of S22.
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
LA：Laws & Application：
Ø Under S15AA Cth AIA, an interpretation best achieving Act’s purpose or object is
to be preferred; and S15AB Cth AIA, extrinsic material can be considered to
determine a provision’s meaning, if the provision is ambiguous or obscure or
leads to a result that is manifestly absurd or is unreasonable; Here, the neighbors
will argue that the second reading speech can be considered when the Act was
first proposed as a draft bill to federal parliament states because Tom created
sounds of over 85 decibels not for commercial or business use.
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
LA：Laws & Application：
Ø In addition, the purpose of the Act, “to stop the harmful effects of loud music on
members of the public because medical research shows any sound over 85
decibels can cause permanent damage to people’s ears...”. Here, the neighbors
will argue that the sound created by Tom is over 85 decibels which can cause
permanent damage to the neighbors’ ears. The main purpose of The Noise Level
Prohibition Act is to keep the sound below 85 decibels not for commercial or
business use. As a result of it, Tom is liable for breach of S22.
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
o Smith v Hughes 1960 1 WLR 830: The Street Offences Act 1959 prohibited soliciting by
prostitutes “in the street”. To try to get around the operation of the Act,the prostitutes began
to try to attract business by standing at their windows or on their balconies and calling out to
passers-by – Ordinary meaningin context of purpose or object? Manifestly absurd or
unreasonable result?
o 1959年的《街头犯罪法》禁止妓女“在街上”拉客。
o 为了避开该法案的实施，妓女们为了招揽生意，她们站在窗户或阳台上，对路人大喊来揽
客。
o 问：请问“妓女们站在窗户和阳台上揽客”违反了法律吗？
§ The legislation covered windows or balconies because even though the prostitutes were
technically not in the street, the purpose of the legislation was to prevent prostitutes
soliciting customers in public. 这项立法覆盖了窗户或阳台，因为即使严格来说妓女不是
在街上，立法的目的是防止妓女在公共场所拉客。
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
o Smith v Hughes 1960 1 WLR 830: The Street Offences Act 1959 prohibited soliciting by
prostitutes “in the street”. To try to get around the operation of the Act,the prostitutes began
to try to attract business by standing at their windows or on their balconies and calling out to
passers-by.
o 1959年的《街头犯罪法》禁止妓女“在街上”拉客。为了避开该法案的实施，妓女们为了招揽生意，她
们站在窗户或阳台上，对路人大喊来揽客。
§ The legislation covered windows or balconies because even though the prostitutes were
technically not in the street, the purpose of the legislation was to prevent prostitutes
soliciting customers in public. 这项立法覆盖了窗户或阳台，因为即使严格来说妓女不是在街
上，立法的目的是防止妓女在公共场所拉客。
§ Tom invites people to his house for free to dance at loud all night parties where the SuperWatz
plays music at 150 decibels. TOM邀请了朋友，免费来自己家通宵大声唱歌跳舞（达到了150分贝）
§ second reading speech: …to stop the harmful effects of loud music on members of the
public because medical research shows any sound over 85 decibels can cause permanent
damage to peoples ears…
经典题型演练（公开练习题）
C：Conclusion：
Ø On the balance of probabilities, a court would most likely find that Tom is liable for
breach of S22/The neighbors can enforce the sounds of under 85 decibels
created by Tom because Tom created sounds of over 85 decibels by a stereo
sound system. Because the main purpose of S22 is to keep the sound below 85
decibels not for commercial or business use.
作业重难点总结 & 建议
1.
注意格式要求，封面、页眉、页脚、脚注不可少。
2.
禁止使用课外法律和任何内容。
3.
字数要求：不超过4500，建议1200左右+2100左右。作业包含两部分。
4.
必须提交3DS，三份。
5.
勿延迟提交作业，勿拖到最后一天。防止网络问题。
6.
早开始少压力。
下节课预告
下节课预告
q 同步辅导课：
Ø Topic 6.1/2 : 经营实体/财务及公司管治：知识点梳理
q 同步拓展课：
Ø Topic 3/4 : 消费者与反竞争行为法or侵权法：知识点梳理+25%相
关例题分析