Trimester 3, 2025
Assessment Type: Case-Based Assignment (Individual)
Weighting: 25%
Learning Outcomes Assessed: ULO 2, 3 and 4
Word Limit: 2,000 words
Due Date: 25 January 2026 (Sunday) 11:59 pm (AEDT)
All submissions must be submitted with a signed Ozford Institute of Higher Education Cover Sheet via Moodle. Late submissions will attract a penalty of 5% of the assessment weighting for each calendar day late unless the lecturer grants an extension.
The assignment consists of two parts.
Part A consists of two (2) cases related to contract law. You are required to provide legal advice to the parties based on the facts presented.
Part B consists of two (2) cases related to the management of companies. You are required to provide legal advice on these scenarios.
Please refer to the marking rubric for further information on the marking criteria.
Marcus was moving out of his share house in Brunswick to a new apartment in South Yarra. He was stressed about the move and asked his friend, Ben, for help. Marcus said to Ben: 'If you spend your Saturday morning helping me load my fridge and sofa into the moving van, I will give you my vintage '90s Melbourne Tigers basketball jersey.' The jersey is a rare collector's item worth approximately $350. Ben agreed, cancelled his brunch plans, and spent four hours helping Marcus move heavy furniture.
A week later, Marcus refused to give Ben the jersey. He argued that four hours of casual help from a friend was not a fair price for a rare jersey worth hundreds of dollars.
Advise Ben as to whether Marcus is legally required to hand over the jersey.
Mandeep has recently arrived in Australia on a student visa to undertake his PhD research. He is living with his wife and his son in Sunshine, Melbourne. Unfortunately, a month after their arrival, his son, Kulbeer, was diagnosed with a rare disease and the treatment of it appears to be very expensive as his family is not entitled to Medicare benefits.
Having no family or friend in Australia or in his home country who can help, Mandeep approached Harry, a student and a new 'friend' at the university where he is undertaking his PhD, to borrow money and shared his situation with Harry. Harry appears to be a friendly person, but he never misses any opportunity to make money. Harry lent $10,000 to Mandeep for two years with an interest rate of 30% per annum. Mandeep was very grateful, but when he told Zara, another student in the faculty, about what happened, she said the interest rate was too high. Zara advised Mandeep to apply for a loan from the university and Mandeep has been successful in his application.
Advise Mandeep as to whether he can cancel the loan agreement.
Ming and Amelia are passionate bakers and have decided to start a small bakery together. They plan to sell a variety of baked goods, including cakes, pastries, and bread. Both of them will be involved in the day-to-day operations and decision-making. They have some savings to invest, but they also plan to take a small business loan to cover initial costs. They are concerned about personal liability and want to ensure that their personal assets are protected in case the business faces any legal issues or debts. After careful consideration, they have decided that forming a company is the best option for their business.
Advise Ming and Amelia on the different types of companies that can be registered under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the type that is most suitable for their business.
The main business of Elite Real Estate Pty Ltd (Elite Real Estate) is real estate development. Janet is the managing director of the company and there are two other directors. At a board meeting of Elite Real Estate six months ago, Janet presented a proposal for the board's consideration that Elite Real Estate should purchase a beachfront property in Mount Martha for the purpose of building luxury apartments.
Janet knew that Latitude Real Estate, a competitor of Elite Real Estate, was also interested in buying the property. Latitude Real Estate offered Janet $50,000 and an all-expenses-paid trip to London if she made sure that Elite Real Estate made an unrealistically low offer for the property.
Janet convinced the other directors of Elite Real Estate to make an unrealistically low offer for the property. This offer was rejected, and the property was ultimately acquired by Noteworthy Ltd.
Advise Janet as to whether she will be liable for breaching any directors' duties under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
| Criteria | High Distinction<br>80-100% | Distinction<br>70-79% | Credit<br>60-69% | Pass<br>50-59% | Fail<br>0-49% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identification of the relevant rules<br>(10 marks) | All the relevant rules have been stated correctly and in enough detail.<br><br>All the relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s) have been referred to as the sources of the law. | Most of the relevant rules have been stated correctly and in enough detail.<br><br>Most of the relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s) have been referred to as the sources of the law. | Many relevant rules have been stated correctly and in enough detail. Some rules may be missing or have not been stated correctly or in enough detail.<br><br>Many relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s) have been referred to as the sources of the law. | About half of the relevant rules have been stated. Other issues may be missing or have not been stated correctly or in enough detail.<br><br>Some relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s) have been referred to as the sources of the law. | Less than half of the rules have been stated or the statements of the rules are not correct or detailed enough.<br><br>There is limited or no reference to the relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s). |
| Application of the rules to the facts<br>(10 marks) | All the rules have been applied to the facts of the case. The argument is cogent and very well structured. | Most of the rules have been applied to the facts of the case. The argument is clear and well structured. However, there is some scope for further development. | Many relevant rules have been applied to the facts of the case.<br><br>The argument is generally supported by reasons. However, some rules have not been applied, or further analysis should be added in some parts of the answer. | About half of relevant rules have been applied to the facts of the case. The argument is clear but not supported in many parts of the answer. | There is limited or no application of the rules to the facts of the case. Limited or no analysis is included to support the argument. |
| Presentation<br>(5 marks) | The assignment demonstrates outstanding written expression. | The assignment demonstrates very good written expression. | The assignment demonstrates good written expression. | The assignment demonstrates acceptable written expression. | The assignment demonstrates poor written expression. |
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
