SEMESTER THREE 2018- BULAW5914 assignment DUE: FRIDAY WEEK 9 BY 4pm – MUST BE SUBMITTED THROUGH TURNITIN ON MOODLE Purpose This significant task requires forward planning and adequate time for...

Running Head: BUSINESS LAW        1
BUSINESS LAW                                        2
BUSINESS LAW
SEMESTER THREE 2018- BULAW5914 ASSIGNMENT
Table of Contents
Introduction    3
Q1.    3
Q2.    6
Conclusion    10
References    11
Introduction
    Although there is a high degree of similarity between the general laws of the society and the business law prevailing in Australian industries, there are ample differences that are worth noticing. The business offers business organisations as well as their customers to conduct transactions with fair practices and tends to solve the issues prevailing, securing the rights of both side, as per the situation demand and the gravity of the consequences.
In case of general laws, the rights of the individuals are given high priority and every person is given the right to avail legal help. However, the claims must be justified to a certain extent so that they can be aligned with legal norms. It is found that in case of both business laws and general laws, people as well as customers sue others without assessing the situation at hand, leading to adverse consequences. In the current assignment, the business laws and general laws have been discussed critically with having two specific case studies in the context of Australia.
Q1.
    Before divulging into the aspect of using Australian Consumer Law, against Samsung, the details of Jane’s case with the use of her Samsung Galaxy Note 7 must be taken under consideration, along the prevailing circumstances and areas of concern. The provided case study shows that Jane purchased Samsung Galaxy Note 7, which was one of the most highly rated smartphones manufactured and sold by the Korean Tech Giants, Samsung, therefore, the numbers of units sold were high and the pricing tend to be on the higher side. Jane purchased the smartphone and expected it to perform safe and smoothly.
However, the smartphone Jane purchased, similar to that of thousands of other Samsung Note 7 devises, caught fire and destroyed Jane’s’ expensive car and caused minor injuries. As per the internal reports provided from inside Samsung, it was found that the internal tests identified issues with the provided batteries of the Samsung Note 7 devices, yet the total recall of the sold devices took place only after a huge number of the devices started to heat up, catch fire and exploded, injuring customers. In Jane’s case, the device caught fire and the degree of inconveniences Jane faced as a customer makes her eligible for suing Samsung under the Australian Consumer Law.
    Considering the mishap Jane had to face due to the catching of fire in Galaxy Note 7 smartphone devices, it is obvious that she would refer to the Australian Consumer Law and charge Samsung about the quality, safety, negligence issues and would claim compensation for the damage done to her car. As noted in the Australian Consumer Law, in case a customer detects a manufacturing defect and inconvenience is caused, the organisation is bound to refund, repair or replace the product to ensure the right of the customers (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, 2019). In case, the customer faces major issues such as getting hurt or damage of property, the person have the right to get adequate compensation from the business organisations.
In consideration of the claims made by the customers in terms of getting compensated, the amount of compensation tends to be under the jurisdiction of the legal framework and the customers are provide the compensations in addition to the product repair, replacement or refund. In Australian Consumer Law, the terms of getting compensation depends on the circumstances, the degree of damage caused and the policies of the business (Australian Consumer Law, 2019). Considering the damage caused to Jane and her car, it can be assumed that the gravity of the issue and the amount of compensation would be significantly high.
    Similar to that of the current case of Samsung Galaxy Note 7 being the responsible for the mishap faced by Jane, it was found that the issues of safety negligence of products are not new. Recorded as one of the costliest and most wide-scale product issue faced by a manufacturer, it was found that in between 1976 and 1980 the global car manufacturer, Ford sold huge number of cars, which had severe safety breaches. The safety breach was identified to be existent in the transmission systems of the car, causing more than 6000 road accidents, a concerning 1700 injuries due to the accidents and a staggering 98 deaths that led to filing of multiple lawsuits against the company. The company offered repair bill payment for 20 million vehicles with the safety issues and compensated for the customers, accounting a total of $1.7 billion (Consumer Report, 2012).
It was found that the company tried to pay only the repairing cost of their faulty vehicles, however, the lawsuits charged for safety negligence made the company pay even more money in form of compensation to the affected customers. However, it is found that companies such as Apple Corp, offer public apology letter as a...