The examination represents 40 of the 100 marks allocated to this unit. Your answer script should be 2000 words in total, ± 10%. You are required to include your word count on the title page. Answers...

1 answer below »









The examination represents 40 of the 100 marks allocated to this unit.


Your answer script should be 2000 words in total, ± 10%. You are required to include your word count on the title page.


Answers must be typed.


















Attempt ALL THREE (3) questions.



Question 1



FACTS


Anita is a student at the Newnham campus of the University of Tasmania. She lives adjacent to the campus. Every evening after finishing classes, she goes back home and brings her dogs to walk around this wide and beautiful campus.


On 13th August 2019, while Anita was walking her dogs, she met her classmate, Danny, and they engaged in a long conversation. Without paying attention, one of her dogs, Alan, went missing. She was very sad as Alan was the very first dog she has raised. On the 14th August 2019, she hence put the following notice nearby the library:


Missing dog, Alan, white poodle with silver necklace bearing its name



044 xxx xxx



Reward Offered: One day free labour plastering, rendering, tiling, painting, odd jobs”


In the evening of 14th August 2019, while Leslie was walking around the campus, he saw this notice. After checking out the book from the library, he found Alan on his way home. He immediately gave a call to Anita as per the phone number given in the notice and brought Alan back to Anita’s house.


In the morning of 17th August 2019, Leslie called Anita asking her to do tiling of his newly refurbished bathroom in his house. Anita refused to do so, maintaining there was no agreement between her and Leslie. Leslie was very angry. Knowing that you are studying Commercial and Transport Law, Leslie is now seeking your advice.



TASK


Discuss and justify your answer with reference as appropriate to legal principles and, if necessary, to relevant case authorities in support of your advice on whether there was a contract between Anita and Leslie and what right Leslie may have against Anita.



[15 marks]



Question 2



FACTS


Jason is a regular shopper at Wonderworld Supermarket, a large nationwide supermarket chain who, since July 2018, established a branch in Mowbray, Tasmania. He goes there at least once a week and sometimes more often.


On 15th August 2019, while Jason was there, he slipped on some bananas on the floor in the vegetable section and he suffered leg injuries. The store manager called the ambulance and Jason was sent to Launceston General Hospital (LGH). According to the store manager, she was not sure how the bananas appeared at the vegetable section or how long they had been there, but the store’s policy is to do checking of the store’s floor every two hours. Jason’s incident was a first of its kind since Wonderworld Supermarket established its chain in Launceston.


At the LGH, the doctor performed operation of Jason’s legs. After the operation with few days of recuperation, Jason could walk although this was not without difficulty and must be with the assistance of a walking stick.


On 19th August 2019, the doctor deemed it was appropriate for Jason to be discharged from the hospital even though Jason still had to walk with the assistance of the walking stick. Jason was very glad. While he was walking out of the LGH, he slipped on an uneven floor nearby the LGH’s exit. Due to this, he suffered further injuries on his legs and he had to undergo a leg operation for the second time. He was very upset with all these series of misfortune.


On 31st August 2019, after Jason was discharged from the LGH and was fully recovered, he decided that he should sue and get compensation from Wonderworld Supermarket, whom he claimed was an initiator of all his misfortune. He wanted to claim AU$8,000 for his initial operation and AU$10,000 for the second operation, plus damages for his mental distress. He is now asking you for your advice on his prospect of success on his claim against Wonderworld Supermarket.



TASK


Advise Jason on his rights against Wonderworld Supermarket. In giving your advice to Jason, you must refer to appropriate relevant legal principles and, if necessary, to relevant case law authorities and relevant statutes (if any) in support of your advice.



[15 marks]



Question 3


Explain and demonstrate your understanding of a two-tier system and a three-tier system of compensation referred to in the below quoted statement:


“Civil liability for oil pollution is covered by various international conventions. Oil spills arising from oil carried as cargo or bunkers on board tankers is covered by a two-and for some countries three-tier system of compensation”.


Institute of Maritime Law 2008,
Southampton on shipping law,
Informa, London, p 254.



[10 marks]

Answered Same DayNov 03, 2021

Answer To: The examination represents 40 of the 100 marks allocated to this unit. Your answer script should be...

Bichitrananda answered on Nov 04 2021
154 Votes
LAW ASSESSMENT
1. In the case of Anita and Leslie, the offer made by the Anita is clearly a unilateral offer which is addressed to the whole world or the entire community of people in that area. Leslie having performed the job or activity is entitled to the reward or service offered in exchange for his performance. To critically examine the offer made by Anita, we need to
look at the elements of the unilateral contract. The first element is the offer made by Anita in the notice she put in the library. The offer states that the individual returning her lost dog would be entitled to free labor that involves plastering, tiling, painting and odd jobs for a full day. This case is also similar to the (Co, 1892), Carlill VS Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. The offer was made by the Carbolic Smoke Ball company to offer 100 pounds to any individual that performed the act of using the smoke ball and got the flu.
In the same way, the offer made by Anita here is the exchange of services like tiling, plastering, painting and odd jobs for a full day. This is the first element of the contract. The second element is the consideration which in this case is the exchange of services for performing the activity of finding and returning the lost dog. In a unilateral contract, acceptance is not required as the acceptance is predicated on the performance of the activity in the contract or offer made. Taking cues from the Carbolic Smokeball case, the offer made by Anita is not vague in the performance of the activity but the audience is not clear. In a court, based on the location of the notice which was the library, the audience would be the students from the university and any other faculty members that had access to the library. Thus it is vital to establish the clarity of the offer made by Anita.
The final element is the acceptance which in this case is the performance of the act. Leslie performed the act that is returning the lost dog and this way accepted the contract. As observed in the (Carlill Vs Carbolic Smokeball Case, [1892]) the acceptance doesn’t precede the performance and the offeror need not be notified as this is a unilateral contract and the performance would serve as notification to the other party in this case for accepting the offer. Another significant observation is that the offer made by Anita didn’t require any notification to perform the act of returning her lost dog. In a unilateral contract, it is also observed if the notice was just a puff without intention or the notice carried the intention that would require promissory note like the Carlill Vs Carbolic Smokeball case. Anita’s notice in the library wasn’t just a mere puff but did hold the intention of promise as the entire case was based on losing something close to her which was her dog. This solidifies the argument of the notice not being a mere puff if the issue is brought up during the trial and there was a clear intention to make this a legal relation like (Merrit Vs Merrit,1970). Hence Leslie has performed the act and fulfilled his obligation of the contract and Anita has to meet her terms of the unilateral contract. After refusing to perform her obligation of the contract, she has breached the terms of the contract and Leslie is entitled to the remedies of the breach of contract.
According to (Australia, 2018), there is a breach of contract when one party fails to meet the terms of the contract or perform their end of the contract who in this case is Anita. Therefore, Leslie can sue her damages and remedies for the breach of contract. The penalty for the breach of contract would be decided by the judge. The remedies for the breach of contract is to resolve in different ways. The different remedies are to resolve the...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here