Example assessment & marking criteria Assessment type: Legal problem-solving model Subject: LAW110 Business Law This subject examines key Australian legal concepts and issues directly relevant to business operations. It covers the structure of the Australian legal system, sources of law, statutory interpretation, the court system and the doctrine of precedent. It then examines substantive areas of tort and contract. Subject learning objectives: (NB: this will change to learning outcomes in 201430): Assessment task: Value & length: Task description: be able to describe the Australian and other legal systems; be able to explain which court has jurisdiction in any particular matter and apply the doctrine of precedent; be able to demonstrate a capacity to engage in legal research; be able to apply the rules of statutory interpretation; be able to explain the law relating to torts, contracts and property be able to identify the legal issues arising out of novel factual situations and apply the law to them. Problem questions 30%, 2500 words Please do not consider the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) in answering these questions, as we have not yet covered that topic. Please structure your answers in accordance with the I.L.A.C method. Part A [15] Mr and Mrs Mendez are elderly and came to Australia as migrants from Colombia about 40 years ago. They are unfamiliar with written English and their spoken English is not very good. They have two sons; Franchesco (27) and Problemo (40). Their son Problemo, a property developer asks his parents to sign a guarantee and mortgage to the Usurer's Commercial Bank as security for payment of the debts of Problemo's company. At the time of signing Problemo led his parent to believe that the guarantee and mortage were for up to $ 50 000 and limited to six months. Mr and Mrs Mendez went to the bank and saw one of the bank loan officers to sign the mortgage. When the loan officer tried to explain to the parents that the guarantee is unlimited in both amount and duration the parents become confused. The parents and the loan officer could not satisfactorily communicate, and the interview concluded by the loan officer stating: ‘It is up to you to decide whether to sign it.’ The loan officer did not explain to the couple the possible effect of the documents, which the Mendez could not read, and he made no mention of the fact that the amount was unlimited. Mr and Mrs Mendez who loved their son very much decided then to sign the mortgage, and eight months later their son’s business collapses with Problemo then owing $500,000 to the bank. Problemo's company went into liquidation and the bank is attempting to exercise its rights under the mortgage/guarantee. Advise the Mendez of their rights. Their other son, Franchesco is thinking of putting in a new air conditioning unit in his factory. He has been in negotiations with Freeze It Aircon Ltd, owned by Fergie. One Monday morning he comes into his office and sees the latest draft contract from Freeze It Aircon, with details of specifications of the air conditioners, price and installation date. The top sheet of the contract contains a space which says “I agree to these terms of supply” and with a space for a signature and date. Franchesco sets the contract aside on his desk, and it soon gets mixed up with piles of other paperwork. Later during the day, he signs the form, thinking that it was the front page of another contract he had been sent by a supplier of microchips. He gives it to his office manager, Tomah, and says “Send this by fax”. A few days later a truck from Freeze It Airon arrives at Frank’s factory. Franchesco phones up Fergie and says he never agreed to the installation. When Fergie tells him about the fax, he realizes his mistake and tells her that he had sent it by accident. She says “Too bad, we have a deal – I have already spent several thousand dollars making customized components for your system”. Franchesco seeks your advice with this matter. Part B [15 marks] Billy and Hillary are very good friends. Billy has recently retired and now has $ 700 000 in super. He asks Hillary,who is an accountant, if he should invest $500 000 of his super funds in Wacky Wackity Ltd. Hillary tells Billy that she has looked at the accounts of that company and it is a good investment. Hillary does not charge Billy for her services as they are very good friends. Unfortunately, Hillary has misread the accounts of the company, which is almost insolvent. Billy invests his money, Wacky Wackity Ltd goes into liquidation and Bill losses $ 500 000. Billy discovers that many accountants and financial planners were aware of the financial position of the company and warnings had been published in several accounting journals and financial newspapers that Wacky Wackity was in financial trouble. Discuss whether Billy has any legal rights against Hillary? Rationale: Hillary is also someone who loves to party. One night she had been at a party and decided to go home at 11.00 p.m. She had been drinking heavily and could not walk properly. She decided to walk home and crossed the road without looking for traffic. Nicky is driving her car down the road, she does not see Hillary because she is looking at herself in the rear view mirror of her car and putting on some lipstick. She hits Hillary and injures her, breaking her two arms. Advise what legal liabilities arise out of this situation. Cite case and statutory law authority where relevant. The assessment task assesses the following learning objectives: your understanding of the law of negligence under the common law and in New South Wales Your understanding of aspects of contract law your ability to apply legal principles and relevant legislative sources to fact-scenarios and to solve legal problems in a very logical manner and by applying substantial legal reasoning. Marking criteria & standards of performance Prepared by Ana Milena Torres Ahumada, Associate lecturer, CSU. Criteria Identification of relevant legal issues Fail Identifies a few legal issues. Some of these may be irrelevant, & or unclearly formulated. Pass Clearly identifies some legal issues. May or may not formulate them as questions. Credit Identifies & correctly formulates most major legal issues. Distinction Correctly identifies major & minor issues & formulates them adequately. Provides relevant sources Provides a limited range of sources. Some of these may be inadequate or irrelevant. Provides both primary & secondary sources. Most of them relevant. Provides relevant sources. Makes specific reference to cases, legislation, & other materials. May or may not use pinpoint referencing. Provides all the relevant sources covered by the subject. It refers to specific legal principles, sections, subsections & may pinpoint reference cases. Development of logical arguments and applies legal principles to the facts The paper is mainly descriptive or lacks coherent arguments. Full of general assertions & claims. Attempts to construct arguments but doesn’t use the law to support them adequately. Shows how the law relates to the facts. Provides somewhat relevant & coherent arguments although not all are properly supported. It provides relevant & coherent arguments, & uses the appropriate legal principles to support them. It provides good coherent arguments, uses the relevant legal principles to support them. Uses critical thinking & groups ideas logically rather than descriptively. High Distinction Comprehensive coverage & identification of major & minor issues. These are postulated with extreme precision. Provides all the relevant cases, legislation & other materials covered by the subject. In addition it may provide current & extremely relevant sources not discussed in the subject. It makes references, with accuracy, to specific legal principles including sections, subsections, & paragraphs amongst others. It provides exceptionally coherent arguments, & uses the relevant legal principles to support all of them. Provides arguments which support a strong view point by using critical thinking, & groups ideas logically & analytically rather than descriptively