HI5015 Legal Aspects of international trade & enterprise
| Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines | |
| Trimester | T1, 2021 |
| Unit Code | HI5015 |
| Unit Title | Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise |
| Assessment Type | Group Assignment |
| Assessment Title | International Law – Case Research Assignment |
| Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) | Students are required to research an International Law Case of your choice from the list provided in this document and explain in a report format, the background of the dispute, the facts, the legal issues and doctrines, individual parties’ arguments, the relevant court’s decision and the overall importance of the case in international law. The following learning outcomes are applicable in this assessment: Understand the overall structure of the global legal environment in which business operates today.Apply an understanding of national and international legal practices to international business law issues.Critically examine the effect the diversity in the international business and legal environment.Critically analyse the social political and economic aspects of global business link and impact on the law.Critically evaluate the diversity and similarity of how firms are currently regulated and governed by global regulatory bodies around the world.Achieve a firm understanding of global legal issues in intellectual property, foreign investment, money and banking, sales, transportation and financing. |
| Weight | 30% of the Total Assessment |
| Total Marks | 30 marks |
| Word limit | 3,000 words (Maximum) |
| Due Date | Week 9 – Friday 21st May, 2021 – 11.59pm |
| Submission Guidelines | All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page.The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings and page numbers.Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style. |
| Adapted Harvard Referencing Holmes has now implemented a revised Harvard approach to referencing: Reference sources in assignments are limited to sources which provide full text access to the source’s content for lecturers and markers. The Reference list should be located on a separate page at the end of the essay and titled: References.It should include the details of all the in-text citations, arranged alphabetically A-Z by author surname. In addition, it MUST include a hyperlink to the full text of the cited reference source. For example; P Hawking, B McCarthy, A Stein (2004), Second Wave ERP Education, Journal of Information Systems Education, Fall, http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf All assignments will require additional in-text reference details which will consist of the surname of the author/authors or name of the authoring body, year of publication, page number of content, paragraph where the content can be found. For example; “The company decided to implement an enterprise wide data warehouse business intelligence strategies (Hawking et al, 2004, p3(4)).” |
*Note: Students are required to form and self-enroll into groups – a maximum of 4 students per group. You will not be able to submit your group assignment unless you are OFFICIALLY enrolled into a designated group in Blackboard (even if it is a solo-group of 1). Submit the group assignment as a single document, including the Holmes official COVER SHEET. Once formed, the group membership should not be changed for the duration of the trimester.
For help with any group assignment matters, please address your email to bbhelpdesk@holmes.edu.au ensuring that your full details (Name, student ID, unit name and number) are included.
Group Assignment Specifications
Purpose:
This group assignment aims to evaluate students’ legal research skills by familiarising themselves with their selected International legal case. Students will need to critically evaluate the background of the case matter (dispute), identify the facts, state the legal issues, put forward both individual parties’ arguments, examine the tribunal’s decision and consider the importance of the case in international law.
Details:
Please organise yourselves into groups of 4 students. The assignment consists of the following:
Group Report – worth 30% and must be submitted on Week 9 – Friday 21st May, 2021 at 11.59pm.
- Select a case from the list of International Law Cases below or refer to the ICJ or WTO websites.
- One member of each group will need to post a message to the discussion board advising all of the other students about which case has been selected. This is very important.
NOTE – NO DUPLICATION OF CASES IS ALLOWED! Each group MUST select a unique case.
- The Unit Co-Ordinator will respond to each group’s post on the discussion board and grant
approval of the selected case, provided that it has not already been selected.
- Research, read and understand your selected International Legal case in groups of four (4) students.
- Prepare and submit a written report discussing the following points as part of the IRAC* method:
- background of the dispute
- brief facts of the case
- the legal issues presented
- the individual parties’ arguments / defenses / perspectives
- the tribunal’s decision / Judgement handed down
- the importance or significance of the case in international law (i.e. why the case is important in the development of international law). You can also discuss any other developments
following the court or tribunal’s decision.
- 10 mins Power-point presentation during the interactive tutorial session from weeks 9 – 12.
(Note – the details of this assessment will be outlined in a separate document and made available on Blackboard)
Group Assignment structure is to be in a report format. It must include:
- Holmes Cover Page
- Executive summary
- Table of contents
- Section headings
- Paragraphing
- Page numbers
- Reference list at the end of the report
(IRAC Method = Issues + Rules (Regulations) + Analysis + Conclusion)
Submission:
- All group report submissions must be done online and run through SafeAssign. No hard copies are to be submitted. Only one group member needs to submit for the whole group.
- Please fill in the “Group Report cover sheet” (available in Blackboard under “Assignments and Due
dates) and attach as a cover sheet to your group report and upload on Blackboard.
- Each group must include the “Peer Evaluation of Individual Participation in Group
Assignment” sheet (available in Blackboard under “Assignments and Due dates) in the report.
- Non-submission of the group report on Blackboard or group reports which have not been submitted through SafeAssign is equivalent to a non-submission, which will mean a mark of 0 (zero) for the group assignment.
- This is a group assignment and is meant to be worked on in groups of four students only.
- Reports must be submitted via Safe-Assign on Blackboard and show a similarity percentage figure. Any group report that does not show a Safe-Assign similarity percentage will not be marked and be required to re-submit.
- Late submissions will be subject to Holmes Institute policy on student assessment submission and late penalties (please refer to subject outline and Student handbook).
Citation and Referencing:
- The group report must have a minimum of six (6) scholarly, academic references, which are appropriate for a Masters Level assignment.
- Assignments are expected to observe proper referencing in accordance with a generally accepted system of citation (e.g. Harvard System). A properly referenced assignment showing in-text citation is critical to passing and obtaining a good mark in the group assignment.
Safe-Assign Similarity Percentage:
- Plagiarism in any form, shape or manner is unacceptable under any circumstances and will be dealt with according to Institute policy on plagiarism. Refer to the section below on Academic Integrity.
- In general, for written reports, a LOW Safe-Assign similarity percentage of 25% or below is acceptable. Regardless of the similarity figure, all group reports must use the correct in-text citation protocols and proper referencing rules.
Academic Integrity
Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding Academic Integrity, as Academic Integrity is integral to maintaining academic quality and the reputation of Holmes’ graduates. Accordingly, all assessment tasks need to comply with academic integrity guidelines. Table 1 identifies the six categories of Academic Integrity breaches. If you have any questions about Academic Integrity issues related to your assessment tasks, please consult your lecturer or tutor for relevant referencing guidelines and support resources. Many of these resources can also be found through the Study Skills link on Blackboard.
Academic Integrity breaches are a serious offence punishable by penalties that may range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment.
Table 1: Six Categories of Academic Integrity Breaches
| Plagiarism | Reproducing the work of someone else without attribution. When a student submits their own work on multiple occasions this is known as self-plagiarism. |
| Collusion | Working with one or more other individuals to complete an assignment, in a way that is not authorised. |
| Copying | Reproducing and submitting the work of another student, with or without their knowledge. If a student fails to take reasonable precautions to prevent their own original work from being copied, this may also be considered an offence. |
| Impersonation | Falsely presenting oneself, or engaging someone else to present as oneself, in an in-person examination. |
| Contract cheating | Contracting a third party to complete an assessment task, generally in exchange for money or other manner of payment. |
| Data fabrication and falsification | Manipulating or inventing data with the intent of supporting false conclusions, including manipulating images. |
INTERNATIONAL LAW CASES (ICJ) AND ADVISORY OPINIONS
Students are to choose a case from one of the following listed below or students may select another international legal case (e.g. from the WTO) with the specific approval and permission of the Unit Co-Ordinator.
Note: Where possible, groups are expected to refer to the text of the original cases and conduct additional research. Do not rely merely on the textbook case summaries because it is not possible to compose a 3,000-word report based solely only on these case summaries. Students will need to access the International Court of Justice website for more detailed information about each case as provided: (https://www.icj-cij.org/en/list-of-all-cases)
(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_International_Court_of_Justice_cases)
Marking Criteria
| Group Report Assessment | Marks | Weighting |
| Introduction to the selected case | 5 | 17% |
| Facts of the case | 6 | 20% |
| Identification of the relevant legal issues and doctrines | 6 | 20% |
| ICJ, Court or Tribunal’s decision | 6 | 20% |
| Formatting, Structure and Report organisation | 4 | 13% |
| Referencing and in-text citation | 3 | 10% |
| TOTAL Weight | 30 Marks | 100% |
Marking Rubric – Group Assignment Report
| Excellent | Very Good | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | |
| Introduction of the case including: the background information and the important case-point. (5 marks) | Demonstration of a thorough knowledge of the chosen case with a clearly stated case-point. (5 marks) | Demonstration of a very good knowledge of the chosen case with a very well stated case- point. (4 marks) | Demonstration of a good knowledge of the chosen case with a well stated case- point. (3 marks) | Demonstration of satisfactory knowledge of the chosen case with a case- point stated. (2.5 marks) | Demonstration of little or no knowledge of the chosen case and discussion has little or no relevance to the case chosen. No case point. (< 2.5 marks) |
| Facts of the case have been stated in a summary paragraph. (6 marks) | Accurately and succinctly identified all of the key facts in relation to the dispute or action brought to the court. (6 marks) | Identification of the main facts in relation to the dispute or action brought to the court. (5.5 marks) | Identification of most but not all of the facts in relation to the dispute or action brought to the court. (4.5 marks) | Identification of some of the facts in relation to the dispute or action brought to the court. | Failure to identify any of the facts in relation to the dispute or action brought to the court. (<3 marks) |
| (3 marks) | |||||
| Identification of | Accurately and succinctly identified all of the issues and sub-issues confronting the parties so as to resolve the problem. (6 marks) | Identification of all of the issues and sub-issues confronting the parties so as to resolve the problem. (5.5 marks) | Identification of | Identification of | Failure to |
| the legal issues | most but not all | some of the | identify any of | ||
| presented and | of the issues | issues and sub- | the issues and | ||
| The individual | and sub-issues | issues | sub-issues | ||
| parties’ | confronting the | confronting the | confronting the | ||
| arguments, with | parties so as to | parties so as to | parties so as to | ||
| equal | resolve the | resolve the | resolve the | ||
| consideration of | problem. | problem. | problem. | ||
| both sides’ | (4.5 marks) | (3 marks) | (<3 marks) | ||
| arguments. | |||||
| (6 marks) | |||||
| Explanation of | Accurately and | Explained all of the ICJ, Court or tribunal’s decision and the significance of the case in international law. (5.5 marks) | Explained most | Explained some | Failure to |
| the ICJ, Court | succinctly | but not all of the | of the ICJ, Court | explain any of | |
| or tribunal’s | explained all of | ICJ, Court or | or tribunal’s | the ICJ, Court | |
| decision and | the ICJ, Court or | tribunal’s | decision and the | or tribunal’s | |
| significance of | tribunal’s decision | decision and the | significance of | decision and | |
| the case in | and the | significance of | the case in | the significance | |
| international | significance of the | the case in | international | of the case in | |
| law. (6 marks) | case in | international | law. | international | |
| international law. | law. | (3 marks) | law. | ||
| (6 marks) | (4.5 marks) | (<3 marks) |
| Overall presentation and quality of report 4 marks | Report is exceptionally structured with clarity, use of paragraphs and subheadings. (4 marks) | Report is well structured with clarity, use of paragraphs and subheadings. (3.5 marks) | Report is somewhat structured with clarity, use of paragraphs and subheadings. (3 marks) | Report is structured with some clarity, and use of some paragraphs and subheadings. (2 marks) | Poorly presented. Report is not structured with any clarity, and does not use of paragraphs and subheadings. (< 2 marks) |
| Referencing 3 marks | Clear systematic referencing using Harvard style for all sources. At least 6 relevant references were used from good sources. All in-text referencing done correctly and relevant. (3 marks) | Clear systematic referencing using Harvard style for all sources. At least 5 relevant references were used from good sources. All in-text referencing done correctly and relevant. (2.5 marks) | Clear systematic referencing using Harvard style for all sources. At least 4 relevant references were used from good sources. Most in-text referencing done correctly and relevant. (2 marks) | Limited attempt at formatting references. References largely unrelated to the topic area. At least 3 references were provided. Most in-text referencing done correctly and relevant. (1.5 marks) | Poorly presented, no apparent structure. No use of Harvard referencing style. References were unrelated to the topic area. Only 0 r 1 relevant reference given (0 – 1.5 marks) |