1. 1 | P a g e
ASSIGNMENT ONE
MEDIA REPORT ANALYSIS
Chicago referencing style:
Farcic, E. 2014. “Builder sues over house on wrong lot.” The West Australian,
September 6-7.
[Word Count: 1878]
1. Identify the areas of law that are relevant to the chosen media report, and
explain how they are relevant to the matters outlined in the report.
The article (Farcic 2014) examines the litigation of the Water Corporation, the
defendant, by building contractor Norvik Industries (Norvik), the plaintiff.
Contract Law
The article makes reference to a number of cases concerning contract law. In one
occurrence, the Water Corporation were commissioned to connect a specific
block to the water network for Norvik. This contract would involve the exchange of
money as consideration for the materials, time, labour and skills necessary to
connect the Webb’s block to the water network (Graw, et al. 2015, 102). The
article specifically references the court writ claiming the Water Corporation
demonstrated inadequate “duty of care” (Farcic 2014) and caused a breach by
failing to meet “an express term of the contract” (Farcic 2014).
While not relevant to Norvik vs Water Corporation, Norvik also have a contract
with Adrian and Linda Webb (Webbs) to construct a house on their previously
acquired block of land. It should be noted that Norvik is also breaching the terms
of their contract as well, by failing to constructing a house on their block. This
entitles the Webbs to seek litigation (Graw, et al. 2015, 261) in order for them to
return to their pre-contractual state, under contract law.
Corporate Law
The Water Corporation, despite being completely owned by the Western
Australian State Government, “is not an agent of the Crown and does not have
the status, immunities and privileges of the Crown” (Western Australia’s Water
Corporations Act 1995, s. 5). The Water Corporation therefore has all the rights

2. 2 | P a g e
and responsibilities of a regular corporate body, this includes liability for torts
committed by its employees via vicarious liability (Graw, et al. 2015, 379).
Corporate law will apply in this case to determine the individual responsibilities of
the employees involved, as determined by the structure of the company and
whether the employees acted in accordance with their duties (Graw, et al. 2015,
385).

3. 3 | P a g e
When considering the timeframe between the error and discovery, a few months
at minimum, the case demonstrates an administrative failure across multiple
parties. Knowledge of Corporate law will help substantiate the responsibilities of
each party, how each party’s administrative procedures should have identified the
problem earlier, in order to determine the proportional obligation and resulting
liability of each party via tort law.
Property Law
Property law is relevant to this case for Norvik, to determine their liability for
damages incurred by other parties as a result of their mistake. The owner of the
property where the house was constructed has suffered a violation of their
property rights (Western Australia’s Building Act 2011, s. 76); the Webbs have not
received the house they commissioned within a reasonable timeframe (Graw, et
al. 2015, 260-261), and the house was constructed without the appropriate
approvals (Western Australia’s Building Act, s. 9). Such issues would allow for
property laws to apply (Graw, et al. 2015, 250).
Tort Law
Tort law applies to cases of civil wrongdoing, where the action or inaction of one
party with a duty of care results in loss, damage or harm of another, irrespective
of malicious intent (Graw, et al. 2015, 438). Tort law is based in common law and
as a commercial body the Water Corporation is subject to these laws. By
extension, any employees of the Water Corporation found to have acted
negligently, not using “due care and skill” (Graw, et al. 2015, 260) by abandoning
proper procedure could also be held personally accountable with tort law.
2. The Law serves a number of different functions. It:
 Ensures reasonable predictability in daily life;
The article demonstrates how simple mistakes can have significant
consequences for third parties in regards to their property. Property laws
supports predictability in daily life by regulating “work affecting other land”
(Western Australia’s Building Act, part 6), with penalties for non-compliance,
which will be enforced against Norvik for “encroaching without consent”
(Western Australia’s Building Act, s. 76).

4. 4 | P a g e
 Encourages and discourages certain conduct
Corporate law provides the outline for the rights and duties of businesses. The
vicarious liability the Water Corporation has for its employees’ mistake
regarding the Webb’s lot is an excellent example of corporate law
simultaneously encouraging responsible corporate behaviour through
“standards of care” (Graw, et al. 2015, 467) by limiting liability while
discouraging non-compliance with penalties and extended liability.
 Grants rights and powers to individuals and groups of people
Property may not display any physical indicators of ownership, however the
concept of property law provides parties with the right and power to claim and
enforce their exclusive use of that property. Property law also applies
conditions to the utilisation of the property in order to minimise potential
negative impact to other parties. The Webb’s enforcement of their rights by
constructing a house on their land is an excellent example of property law in
action. In addition, Norvik constructing a house on the wrong lot violates the
rights of that landowner, giving them the power to litigate for compensation for
the damages or loss caused by Norvik’s mistake.
 Imposes obligations on individuals/organisations to meet their legal
responsibility
The concept of imposed obligations to meet a legal responsibility is best
realised through tort law. Tort law has evolved to recognise that negligent
behaviour has a cost associated with it. Through the enforcement of tort law,
parties are required to meet their legal responsibilities to other parties, to act
with due care to minimise the risk of hurt or loss. The Water Corporation, by
negligently connecting the wrong property to the water network, caused Norvik
damages of at least “$519,000” (Farcic 2014).
 Allows for the enforcement of recognised rights and duties
The case of Norvik and the Water Corporation highlights how the
responsibilities of each parties can be enforced through contract law. Norvik’s
contract with the Water Corporation earned Norvik the right to have the correct
lot connected to the water network. In return Norvik were responsible for
providing adequate consideration for the time, labour, skills and materials
required by the Water Corporation in order to provide that service (Graw, et al.
2015, 102).

5. 5 | P a g e
 Provides remedies when an injustice has been done
Through tort law, events that cause harm or loss to another party as a result of
negligent behaviour can be prosecuted, allowing for the victim to receive
remedies. Norvik suffered losses timewise and financially due to the Water
Corporation’s mistake, tort law provides Norvik a legal avenue for mitigate at
least part of their losses, while holding the Water Corporation accountable for
its mistake. In addition, the precedent set by a successful plaintiff increases
the risk of successful future litigation for similar cases, encouraging the Water
Corporation to demonstrate better duty of care in future.

6. 6 | P a g e
3. By reference to the legal issues contained in the chosen media report,
explain why it was important for the relevant party/parties to know the law in
the circumstances? How did, or could, the party/parties have applied the
law to their advantage?
A clear understanding of the legal rights and duties of each party is essential for
reducing the risk and potential harm or loss to all parties involved, as well as,
protecting each party from lawsuits against them.
As reported by the article, Norvik is attempting to reverse the losses it incurred by
constructing an unauthorised building. Norvik put ‘blind faith’ in the Water
Corporation to complete their job correctly. This ‘blind faith’ resulted in Norvik
suffering financial damage “the estimated cost to build the new house was
$519,000” (Farcic 2014).
Through applying the concepts of “express term of the contract” (Farcic 2014) and
“duty of care” (Farcic 2014) Norvik hope to gain advantage in their case. “Express
terms” refer to the parties’ intentions to include specific conditions as part of the
contract, although not explicitly mentioned (Graw, et al. 2015, 102) and “duty of
care” refers the reduction of risk against ‘reasonably foreseeable’ losses or
damages between sufficiently close parties (Graw, et al. 2015, 458). By extending
the Water Corporation’s liability, Norvik could seek mitigation (Graw, et al. 2015,
197) using the concept of causation (Graw, et al. 2015, 192).
The Water Corporation will likewise use its knowledge of the law to reduce their
implied responsibilities to Norvik, in order to reduce their liability under the
contract. As the contract between the Water Corporation and Norvik was only to
connect the Webb’s lot to the water network, the Water corporation could argue
that their sole obligation was to connect the Webb’s lot, which they could connect
as per their agreement concluding their contract.
The Water Corporation could deflect responsibility for noticing the mistake to
other parties, limiting their liability to Norvik. This could potentially be achieved by
scrutinizing the procedures of; Norvik’s auditing division, local government
agencies or any other entity that likely completed an appraisal of the property. By
transferring responsibility for identifying the mistake to these other parties, the
Water Corporation will limit the duration of their implied liability to the first
inspection (Graw, et al. 2015, 197) following the lot’s connection to the water
main. In addition, if the Water Corporation could convince the judge of limited

7. 7 | P a g e
liability, they could potentially counter sue Norvik for unnecessary financial
damage due to the previous ligation process.

8. 8 | P a g e
4. How do the media influence public perceptions about the law and its
administration? How might public pressure impact legislators and judges in
establishing the law?
The media’s ability to change hearts and minds through their presentation of
information is both powerful and dangerous. The inherent cognitive traps
confronting journalists while processing information were recognised by Stocking
and Gross (1989, chap. 1), and remain critically relevant in modern society; not
only to journalist but extending to the general public via access to the internet.
Articles in popular media can be the public’s initial exposure to a story or event.
The knowledge gained from these articles can become the standard that all future
information is validated by, known as “confirmation bias” (Stocking and Gross
1989, 27). When articles are produced in order to generate a particular response,
this gives the media the power to position the public on issues before the public
can access to all the necessary information in order to make informed opinions.
Once theories about the issue are formed, theory consistency biases (Stocking
and Gross 1989, 35-36) deter people from altering their position on issues.
Opinions presented by the media, who may not have expertise in those fields,
have the power to drive emotive responses to issues. Large scale emotive
responses put pressure on legislators to act in response to these issues.
Law creation is managed by the government, considering popular vote is how
politicians are elected, the influence of public pressure could have significant
impact on legislation.
Judges can interpret law and extend its application via precedent. As the law is
objective judges are able to minimise their emotive response to issues, however
they are still human so public pressure will occasionally weigh into the
interpretation of the law. It would likely feature in the “obiter dicta” (Graw, et al.
2015, 35) of the judgement.

9. 9 | P a g e
References
Farcic, Elle. 2014. "Builder sues over house on wrong lot." The West Australian,
september 6-7.
Graw, Stephen, David Parker, Keturah Whitford, Elfriede Sangkuhi, and Christina Do.
2015. Understanding Business Law. 2nd Ed custom publication for Curtin
University. Chatswood: LexisNexis.
Stocking, S. and Paget Gross. 1989. How Do Journalists Think? A Proposal for the
Study of Cognitive Bias in Newsmaking. Indiana: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Reading and Communication Skills.
Legislation
Building Act 2011 (WA).
http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/pco/prod/FileStore.nsf/Documents/MRDocument:24
906P/$FILE/Building%20Act%202011%20-%20[01-a0-05].pdf?OpenElement
Water Corporations Act 1995 (WA).
http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/pco/prod/FileStore.nsf/Documents/MRDocument:28
269P/$FILE/Water%20Corporations%20Act%201995%20-%20[04-b0-
01].pdf?OpenElement
Water Services Act 2012 (WA).
http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/pco/prod/FileStore.nsf/Documents/MRDocument:25
642P/$FILE/Water%20Services%20Act%202012%20-%20[01-a0-
03].pdf?OpenElement