Looking for customized, unused and Plagiarism free solutions ???
Australian Commercial and Corporations Law
Please reference all sources.
Word limit for each question is 700 words.
Question 1 (10 marks) – Contract law
Wallace was a professional rugby player who plays for the Brisbane Rough Riders rugby side. During a match early in the season Wallace injures his knee. His injury is quite bad and he is advised that if he has surgery he will not be able to play for the rest of the season, but would be fit for the next preseason and season. An alternative was to resume playing after only three weeks and play out the season with the benefit of pain killing injections and other therapy.
Wallace was not contracted with the Rough Riders for the next season. Wallace was approached by his coach Ronny Rancid, who told him the Rough Riders will give him a contract for next season if he chose the second option to defer surgery. Keen to continue playing and hoping that he could continue his career he played on through the season.
A week before the season end Wallace is told by the club that he would not be playing next season for them. Desperate to play on he looks for another club but was unsuccessful. He feels that if he cannot play for the coming season no club will be interested in him.
Assuming that Ronny Rancid acted with the authority of the club, advise Wallace whether the rough riders were obliged to give him a contract for the following year.
Question 2 (10 marks) – Contract law
Bob Baxter loves to go to theme parks on the Gold Coast. On 1st April Bob attends Wally World theme park. He stands in the queue waiting for a ticket and sees a sign above the ticket box that says, “Look at your ticket, conditions apply.” Bob buys a ticket. On the front of the ticket it says, “See back” and on the back the following clause appeared,
“Any person riding on the Wally World chair lift does so entirely at their risk and assumes all risks incidental thereto. Neither Wally World or their employees will be liable for any injuries sustained in connection with riding the chair lift.”
Bob stood ready to board the chair lift. When it arrived the attendant helped Bob into a seat and pulled a safety bar down in front of him. As the chair lift started to move Bob’s jacket became snagged in a guide post and tore. This was caused by the attendant as he pulled the safety bar down. The safety bar was now not properly fitting around Wallace.
When Bob was high up in the air a pigeon flew into the rides motor short circuiting the motor and causing the ride to stop. The operators of the ride had difficulties restarting it. Eventually they decide to summon the fire brigade to assist people off the ride. No one was in any danger as they waited for the fire brigade.
Bob did not like waiting and thought if he could swing the seat far enough he could jump onto a pylon nearby and descend on the metal ladder attached to the pylon. Unfortunately in trying this he missed the pylon altogether and feel through branches of a tree before hitting the ground. The branches broke his fall a bit. When Bob regained consciousness he found himself in the Wally World first aid room. He had suffered a broken leg as well as a smashed watch in the fall.
Does the exemption clause form part of the contract? Does the exemption clause cover what happened?
ILAC? What’s that?
Here is a simple guide to tackling law problem based questions.
It’s called the ILAC method. ILAC stands for:
? Application or Arguments; and
It sets out a simple and logical manner in which law based problem questions can be answered. It is not directly relevant for assignment questions which are not problem based. If your assignment is more theory based it may need adaptation.
Let’s apply ILAC in practice.
Every question has an issue or issues. There may be 2- 4 issues in a question but the important thing is to identify all relevant issues the question is asking.
The issue(s) is what must be addressed in your answer first. Do not put down everything you have learnt in the vain hope that it is relevant to the question. Make sure you only address the actual issues the question deals with.
For example the issue may be whether there is a valid contract in place and it then comes down to whether there has been a valid offer that has been validly accepted.
Be mindful of the fact that there can be “hidden” issues besides the obvious. The ability to identify these underlying issues distinguishes an average student and an A student
B. Law or Principles
The next thing you need to do is to identify the appropriate legislation or case law or both.
You must state only the law that is relevant to the question. This means that you should refer to relevant case law and/or relevant legislation. You need to clearly explain what that law is. You need to do so in a practical way that addresses the issues you have already identified.
C. Application and Discussion
Taking the law discussed in part B you now must seek to apply it to the facts of the question. You are effectively using the law as a tool to address the problem and try to come to an answer for the question posed to you.
This is not easy and that is why more marks will apply here to this section. You need to assess and weigh up how the law applies and whether it adequately addresses the issues. You are having a discussion as to how the law may apply and whether there are any problems with its application. It is not a case of one size fits all. Sometimes the law applied to a particular set of circumstances will give a different result than when applied to other circumstances. It is how well you argue how the law applies or not that gains the marks.
You must end your answer with a conclusion. You need to summarise the law (B) and application (C) to give you a final statement that answers the question asked. The conclusion does not repeat part B and C but briefly summarises the main points and explains the final conclusion arising from those parts. The conclusion must address the question asked. Make sure of that.
Bob explains to Sally that he has a block of land for sale.
Sally asks Bob “What is the lowest price you will sell the land for?”
Bob replies, “$1000.”
Sally says “great I will buy it for $1000.” Bob does not reply.
Later Sally says she has a contract with Bob. Bob says there is no contract. Who is correct?
Using ILAC what is the answer?
The issue is whether there is a contract or not. This requires determining if there is an offer that has been accepted.
A valid offer must be made to the offeree. The offeree must have validly accepted that offer. Whilst there are other requirements for a valid contract the question requires us to address these facts and they relate to whether there is a valid offer that has been accepted. An offer must clearly indicate that the person is willing to enter into a binding contract.
An offer has to clearly indicate that the person is willing to enter into a binding contract if accepted. Bob has the land for sale, but all he has done is replied to Sally’s question. He has simply supplied information. He has not made an offer. Harvey v Facey is a case that supports that finding. The only offer that has been made is from Sally which Bob has not accepted.
There is no contract.
Question Set #327
Word Count: 1516 words including References File Format: Microsoft Word Document Editable: Yes
Attachment: Click here to download