Length: 2000 words Submission method options: Alternative submission method Task back to top You must answer the two problem-type questions below, using the ILAC (Issues, Law, Application, Conclusion)...

1 answer below »

Length:2000 wordsSubmission method options:Alternative submission method

Task



back to top

You must answer the two problem-type questions below, using the ILAC (Issues, Law, Application, Conclusion) format, a worked example of which is in the Resources folder.Pleasenote that the word limit of 2 000 words is atotal for both questions(ie, it is not 2 000 words for each question). This is afirm limit- work in excess of 2 000 words will notbe marked.I would however expect that students should be able to answer both questions in far less than 2 000 words.Your bibliography is not included in the word limit but in-text references are.**In this subject, assignments are marked on-line, using an adapted MS Word programme. You therefore MUST submit your assignment in Word format, NOT as a PDF document. If you submitin PDF it will not be able to be marked.**

Question 1 (10 marks)






Steve Jones is an entrepreneur with a variety of business interests. He learned of a gold deposit in Western Australia. Because he was anxious to exploit the opportunity, he flew to Perth and on 6 July and entered into a contract to buy a drilling machine from Thor Mining Machinery Ltd, to be used to drill a test shaft. The contract specified that the drill would be delivered, and payment of the $ 125 000 price would fall due, on 30 July. He signed the contract as follows:






Steve Jones, on behalf of WA Gold Exploration Ltd.






WA Gold Exploration Ltd was registered as a company by ASIC on 10 July, with Steve as 90% shareholder. He and the other shareholders met on 11 July, to elect a board of five directors. Steve himself was not elected to the board, because although he had originally discovered the opportunity, he had no experience in mining operations, and so did not want to be a director.






On 14 July, the board signed a contract with for a fleet of five ore trucks from Volvo Trucks (Australia) Ltd, costing a total of $ 500 000, to be delivered on 30 September. The board also established a sub-committee to determine the company’s technical needs, and on 25 July the board accepted the committee’s recommendation that the company buy a drill from United Mining Machinery Ltd for $ 100 000. The board also contacted Thor Mining Machinery Ltd and told it that it would not be taking delivery of the drill.






Unfortunately, in mid-September it became clear that the gold deposit was not as large as hoped, and the board ceased trading on the basis that the company had only $ 400 000 in assets and had accumulated $ 2 million in liabilities. The company is therefore unable to pay for the trucks.






Steve, who has personal assets of $ 1 million, has now been sued for breach of contract by both Thor Mining Machinery Ltd and Volvo Trucks (Australia) Ltd. Assume you are his legal advisor. Prepare advice for him citing full legal authority, as to what his legal position is.










Question 2 (10 marks)






Simon, George, Sara and Mary were all employed by different IT companies. However, they felt that they could do better if they went into business themselves. They pooled their available cash and drew up a partnership agreement, which stated that each partner had authority to enter into transactions on behalf of their firm, which they called Computer Solutions. The firm operates in Sydney and provides a service of storing data for customers. The agreement states that partners have authority to enter into contracts of up to $ 10 000, but that any contract for more than that must be approved unanimously by all partners.






George, Sara and Mary approach you for legal advice in relation to two transactions entered into by George, who had acted without referring back to the partners.






One was for a 50TB hard-drive, bought by Simon on behalf of Computer Solutions, from Sunstar Computer Hardware Ltd, costing $ 15 000.






The other was for a second-hand ute, costing $ 9 000, which Simon ordered for the firm from You Beaut Ute Ltd, on the basis that the partnership should branch into the freight business – an idea that the other partners had previously rejected.





**Please check that your assignment complies with the rules in the Style Guide before you hand it in.**

Rationale



back to top


This assessment task will assess the following learning outcome/s:



  • be able to anlayse the rules of statutory interpretation and the law relating to torts, contracts, property, agency, partnerships and corporations.

  • be able to distinguish between rules of law and exercise judgement in applying the law to complex legal problems.

and more specifically:

  • yourknowledge of the law relating to incorporation.

  • your knowledge of the law relating to partnership.

  • your ability to undertake an assessment task relevant to the workplace and professional practice.

Answered Same DaySep 06, 2020

Answer To: Length: 2000 words Submission method options: Alternative submission method Task back to top You...

Abr Writing answered on Sep 09 2020
158 Votes
Law module
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION    2
QUESTION 1- THE CONCEPT OF INCORPORATION    2
QUESTION 2- PARTNERSHIP    3
CONCLUSION    6
REFERENCES    7
INTRODUCTION
In the legal terms concept of incorporation is consider as significant aspect as it support in forming a corporate entity that would be separate from its owners. However, incorporation has certain advantages for the business and owners that mainly include it pro
tection of owner assets against the liability of company (Trautman et al. 2017). On the contrary to this is partnership that ensures partners often go into the business together and they have no separate entity from the firm. The present report focuses on assessing the two different scenarios by using ILAC format that support in solving the provided case. The first case that needed to be assessed measure the concept of incorporation while the another case features the partnership approach.
QUESTION 1- THE CONCEPT OF INCORPORATION
Case: It states that Steve Jobs has engaged in improper activities that include signing contact by Thor Mining was not valid as he has entered into agreement with the company name that was not even formed at that time. Thus, he is liable for paying amount of the machinery.
Issue- The issue in case is that Steve has signed agreement on behalf of WA gold Exploration Ltd. on 6th July and he has registered his company by ASIC on 10th July. In this case the contract formulated by Thor Mining Machinery Ltd for drill machinery would be not valid from the company aspect. On the other hand, board of WA Gold Exploration has signed contract on 14th July for purchasing the fleet as well as five trucks for their business activities form Volve Trucks Australia that cost for $ and will be delivered on 30th September. Along with buying drill machine from United Mining Machinery Ltd for 500000. But in the mid-September it was found that gold deposit were not successful and it lead to high liability on the company as they were unable to pay for the trucks. This issue has affected Steve as both the company Thor Mining and Volve Trucks (Australia) has sued Steve for breaching the contract.
Law- Through reviewing the Company Act it was found that company registered under ASIC on 10th July. Under the act without registering the company, individual is not accountable for entering into contract with the name of company (Guinnane, 2018). Steve enters the contact with Gold Mining Exploration Ltd without registering the company therefore the contract is not valid on the behalf of Steve. On the other hand, directors have made decisions regarding purchase of products and goods from the suppliers without considering the capital that they have to purchase the products (Means, 2017). However, Steve has just explore the opportunity but he is unaware regarding the gold market therefore, it results in taking improper decisions related with purchasing the materials. On the other hand, the law also states that owner has majority of rights towards accepting and rejecting the decision made by board of directors. The directors are liable to make decision on behalf of the owner and company as they are the legal representative accordant with the law.
Application- With the applicability of Companies Act it has been stated that Steve has no right to enter into the contract under the name of WA gold Exploration Ltd. However, the company registered after Steve has signed the contract for buying the drill machine. At the time of electing board of members he himself was not nominated to the panel, as he had no experience in the field of gold exploration but he has discovered the opportunity. Thus it was the reason that overcomes Steve to become one of the members of board (Kraakman and Hansmann, 2017). Along with this, when board of directors has made contract for acquiring fleet and five trucks from Volve truck Australia at time total assets of company were limited and they have entered into the contract. On the other hand, with the applicability of the law it has been also assessed that Steve would not have registered the company due to lack of experience as he would be not applicable in undertaking the effective and fait decision (Gerner-Beuerle, et al. 2017)....
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here