1
LAW10003 Contract Law II
Assessment details
Critical Case Comment
Due:
11pm Monday 6 August 2018
Length:
1500–2000 words (bibliography and footnotes not counted in the
word limit; any excess will not be marked)
Weighting:
40%
Learning outcomes:
1–5 (see below)
Submission method:
electronic copy only via Turnitin
Your assignment is expected to demonstrate that you can:
1. identify the legal and policy issues in complex contractual cases and hypothetical
situations;
2. apply relevant legal principles to the resolution of these issues;
3. critically analyse aspects of contract law from a particular theoretical perspective;
4. develop high levels of skill in the reading of statutes and/or cases; and
5. write in clear and logical language.
Purpose
The purpose of this assessment is to provide you with the opportunity to demonstrate and
further develop your critical analysis skills in the area of Contract Law. You may want to
efresh your understanding of what critical analysis is in the context of law by revisiting the
study materials for LAW00111 Legal Process.
Whilst Contract Law is traditionally considered to be a ‘black letter’ law unit, it is clear from
the theories and critical perspectives (introduced in LAW10001 Contract Law I and Chapter 1
of your prescribed text), that judges are influenced by different social and policy
considerations in the judgments they make. It is important that you develop the skill of
analysing cases to reveal these influences. This assessment item gives you the opportunity to
do this.
2
You are asked to analyse an area of Contract Law so as to gain a deeper understanding of the
social and policy considerations that may influence the development and application of
cu
ent legal principle. This will assist you to develop the following capacities:
to read and comprehend complex legal decisions
to engage in sophisticated arguments based on legal principle, and
to formulate principled arguments to extend or modify the application of existing
laws.
Assignment question
Read the following case:
Case: Brisbane City Council v Group Projects Pty Ltd [1979] HCA 54
http:
eresources.hcourt.gov.au/showbyHandle/1/11467
Guiding question for your case comment:
Does the decision in Group Projects support the understanding of the role of the court as stated by
the proponents of Classical Contract Theory?
Assignment instructions
You are required to prepare a critical case comment on this case in light of the material you
are learning in this unit – that is, the material contained in the relevant topics (Topics 1 and
2) in your Study Guide and readings, and through your own research.
Use the guiding question to assist you to construct your analysis and to guide your research.
In particular, it asks you to engage in a critique that identifies how Classical Contract Theory
has (or has not) influenced the decision made by the judges in this case. That is, you are
expected to engage in an explicit discussion of Classical Contract Theory (which includes the
elated discussion in the text of Promise Theory and Consent Theory) in your analysis of this
case (see in particular, TB: [1.05]-[1.25]; CB: [1.05]-[1.25]).
The word limit given indicates the maximum number of words for your work. However, it also
guides you in relation to the expected length of your work. If your work falls far short of the
minimum word limit, you are unlikely to achieve a good mark. Ideally, your answer should
meet the minimum word count but must not exceed the maximum word limit. Any words
exceeding the maximum word limit WILL NOT BE MARKED. The word limit is prescribed to
ensure that students’ work is comparable and that no student is advantaged when they write
an excessively long piece of work enabling them to explore issues more carefully than other
students who have stayed within the prescribed limits.
You must provide a reference to any materials to which you refer. You must also provide
footnotes as appropriate, and a bibliography of materials used, and must use footnotes as
outlined in the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (3rd ed).
http:
eresources.hcourt.gov.au/showbyHandle/1/11467
3
References do not form part of your word count. For this reason, footnotes should contain
only citation information. Any other information provided in footnotes will be ignored. If the
information is worth saying – say it in the body of your written work!
Structure of your case comment
Your case comment should use the following format:
1. Case citation
2. Brief summary of facts
3. Brief summary of procedural history
4. Brief summary of the ratio decidendi
*5. Critique
We suggest (at the very least) you outline the basics of Classical Contract Theory and
explore at least one, if not more, of the relevant theorists (i.e Fried, Smith, Barnett)
mentioned in your textbook and/or casebook in respect of their view of the role of the
court to ‘fill gaps’ (imply terms or end a contract by frustration). You should also examine
(although you are certainly not limited to) the academic articles refe
ed to in the
footnotes of your textbook/casebook for Topics 1 and 2).
6. Brief conclusion to draw together the themes/ main points of your critique.
* Note well – this section (the Critique) of your discussion is the most significant to the skills
eing tested by this assessment. We strongly recommend that you allocate sufficient words
from your word limit to explain and demonstrate your critique. As a rough guide, about half
of your total words should be used to write this section.
Marking criteria for this assessment
States parameters/focus of the case comment
Provides accurate summary of facts of case
Provides accurate summary of ratio decidendi
Demonstrates a well-developed critical analysis of the case by:
o developing argument (position) in response to question
o developing argument (position) accurately, coherently and persuasively and
o supporting its arguments with appropriate and relevant evidence
Paper well organised and structured
Quality of written expression – clear and concise, with accurate spelling and grammar
Citations accurate, comprehensive and according to AGLC (3rd ed)
Return of Assignments
For only those Assignments submitted on or before the due date, every effort will be made to
mark and return these assignments to students within three weeks of the due date.
4
Marked Assignments will be uploaded to the Grade Centre in your MySCU learning site.
The Unit Assessor reserves the right to set an alternative assessment task where for any reason
an Assignment has not been handed in within three weeks after the due date.
Paraphrasing and Plagiarism
The failure to provide a citation and/or to paraphrase (unless direct quotes are appropriate)
when you refer to the work of others amounts to a
each of the University’s policy on Student
Academic Integrity and may result in you obtaining a fail in this unit or facing other disciplinary
sanctions. Do not be tempted to use someone else's work and pass it off as your own – such
action constitutes plagiarism. This includes paying someone else to prepare your work – this is a
very serious form of academic dishonesty.
If an allegation under the Student Academic Integrity policy is proven against you, as well as
having penalties imposed by the University, you are very likely to have to disclose this matter if
you seek admission to the legal profession (and possibly to other professional accrediting bodies).
Legal profession admitting authorities take ALL forms of academic dishonesty very seriously and
may deny or delay the admission of any person against whom an allegation of plagiarism or
academic dishonesty has been proven.
Severe penalties are also imposed by the University in response to all forms of plagiarism and
academic dishonesty. Plagiarism is very easy to detect for people whose job it is to distinguish
etween styles of writing. Plagiarism is committed when a person takes ideas from the literature or
from another student and presents those ideas as his/her own. Though you may not present
someone else's work word-for-word, you are required to acknowledge the author of the original
source even if you re-phrase, embellish or simply change it around. If you quote the actual words of
the author, then merely to provide a footnote indicating the source of the idea, this is insufficient.
You must also provide quotation marks, or indent a lengthy quotation. There must also be a footnote
indicating the exact source of the quotation.
The habit of taking notes ve
atim from any source may get you into trouble if you fail to note
the origin of those sources. It is easy to later forget that the notes are ve
atim and to include
them into an assignment. Plagiarism is avoided by always acknowledging the source of any ideas,
statements, etc, if they have come from another person's work. You do this by using the co
ect
eferencing practices.
To ensure you understand the seriousness of plagiarism, when submitting your assignment you
are required to explain the Turnitin Similarity percentage for your paper. More guidance is
available on MySCU to assist you.
IMPORTANT: Do not allow someone else to do your assignments for you. You are the one
enrolled in the award, not your mentor, tutor, husband/wife/partne
est friend – or an online
tutor service that is paid to complete academic work. Allowing someone else to complete your
assignments – whether for fee or not – is a form of academic dishonesty for which severe
penalties apply. All of these behaviours could amount to ‘cheating’ under the Academic Integrity
Policy – harsh penalties will be applied if an allegation of cheating is proven against you. A proven
allegation of Academic dishonesty or any other type of fraud will impede any future application
for admission to legal practice.