HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
HI6027 Business and Corporate Law Group Assignment T1
2021
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester T1 2021
Unit Code HI6027
Unit Title Business and Corporate Law
Assessment Type Group Assignment
Assessment Title Case Studies on Contract Law and
Corporations Law
Purpose of the
assessment (with
ULO Mapping)
The purpose of the Group Assignment is to provide students

with an opportunity to
work in a collaborative environment in solving three case
problems by citing the
relevant legal rules and cases and applying these to the facts of
the case.
In this Group Assignments, students are required to:
- Critically analyse the main features of the Australian Legal
System and the
foundations of company law. (ULO 1)
- Critically analyse the basic principles of Contract, Tort, and
privacy law and apply
them in resolving legal issues arising in commercial
transactions. (ULO 2)
- Research and advocate the appropriateness of the different
types of business
structures and the legal environment in which they operate and
their advantages and
disadvantages in various commercial contexts. (ULO 4)
Weight 40% of the total assessments
Total Marks 40%
Word limit Group Written Report of maximum 2,000 words
Due Date Week 10
Submission
Guidelines
● All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date
along with a completed

Assignment Cover Page.
● The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 12-
pt Arial font and 2 cm
margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section
headings and page
numbers.
● Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and
listed appropriately
at the end in a reference list using the AGLC style.
Page 2 of 11
2021
Assignment Specifications
Purpose:
The Group Assignment aims to provide students with an
opportunity to work in a collaborative
environment in solving three case problems by citing the
relevant legal rules and cases and applying
these to the facts of the case.
Students are to form groups, with a minimum of 2 and a

maximum of 4 students per group. The
assignment consists of a 2,000-word written report.
Instructions: Please read and re-read carefully to avoid
mistakes.
Group Report
1. This group assignment consists of 3 parts. Part A is a
question on Contract Law, and Part B and
Part C are questions involving Corporations Law. All questions
must be answered.
2. Question A is worth 20 marks, while Question B and
Question C are worth 10 marks each.
3. The total word limit for the group report is 2,000 words (+/ -
10% allowed)
● Word limit for Question A – 1,000 words
● Word limit for Question B – 600 words
● Word limit for Question C – 400 words
Word count limits are strictly enforced. A deduction of two (2)
marks will be imposed for every 50
words over the word count for either part of the report.

Anything over the word count will not be
read by your lecturer.
4. The total word count for the report as well as each part must
be clearly written on the cover sheet
of the assignment. A paper will not be marked if the word
counts are not written on the cover
sheet.
5. The group report is worth 40% of total marks in this unit.
Important Reminders:
● You must form your groups by self-enrolment in Blackboard.
Please refer to the document “Group
Assessment Self Enrolment Tutorial” that has been posted in
Blackboard (under announcements
and also in the “Assessments” folder). This document will assist
you with the process of self-
enrolling in a group to undertake an assessment task in
Blackboard Ultra.
● All group report submissions must be de done online and run
through SafeAssign. No hard copies
are to be submitted. Only one group member needs to submit for
the whole group.

● You must attach as the official Holmes Institute cover sheet
to your group report and upload on
Blackboard.
● The Group report must be submitted via SafeAssign on
Blackboard and show a similarity
percentage figure. Any group report that does not show a
SafeAssign similarity percentage will
not be marked and be required to re-submit.
● Late submissions will be subject to Holmes Institute policy on
student assessment submission
and late penalties (please refer to subject outline and Student
handbook).
Page 3 of 11
2021
● All reports are expected to observe proper referencing in
accordance with the Australian Guide
to Legal Citation (AGLC). A copy of the AGLC has been posted
in the Week 2 tutorial folder.
You may also download a copy for free via this link:

https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/3181325
/AGLC4-with-Bookmarks-1.pdf
● In general, for written reports, a SafeAssign similarity
percentage of 25% or below is acceptable.
Regardless of the similarity figure, all group reports must use
in-text citation and observe proper
referencing rules.
● All assignments are expected to strictly follow Holmes
Institute’s Academic Conduct and Integrity
Policy and Procedures. A copy of the Policy is available on the
Holmes Institute home page.
(About Holmes > Policies) This policy is also explained in your
Student Handbook.
● Plagiarism and contract cheating in any form will not be
tolerated and will have severe
consequences for the groups found committing the same,
including receiving zero (0) for the entire
assignment and possible failure in the unit.
● Any group assignment that is found to contain fake or bogus
references or references that are
clearly irrelevant to the subject matter of the assignment will
receive an automatic zero (0) mark.
● IMPORTANT: Identification of individual work. To ensure

that all students participate
equitably in the group assignment and that students are
responsible for the academic integrity of
all components of the assignment, each group must complete the
following table which identifies
which student/students are responsible for the various sections
of the assignment:
Assignment section Student/Students
This table needs to be completed and submitted with the
assignment as it is a compulsory
component required before any grading is undertaken.
Adapted Harvard Referencing
Holmes has now implemented a revised Harvard approach to
referencing:
1. Reference sources in assignments are limited to sources that
provide full-text access to the
source's content for lecturers and markers.

2. The Reference list should be located on a separate page at
the end of the essay and
titled: References.
3. It should include the details of all the in-text citations,
arranged A-Z alphabetically by
author surname. In addition, it MUST include a hyperlink to
the full text of the cited
reference source.
https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/3181325
/AGLC4-with-Bookmarks-1.pdf
Page 4 of 11
2021
For example:
P Hawking, B McCarthy, A Stein (2004), Second Wave ERP
Education, Journal of
Information Systems Education, Fall,
http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf
4. All assignments will require additional in-text reference
details, which will consist of the
surname of the author/authors or name of the authoring body,

year of publication, page
number of content, the paragraph where the content can be
found.
For example:
"The company decided to implement an enterprise-wide data
warehouse business
intelligence strategies (Hawking et al., 2004, p3(4))."
Non - Adherence to Referencing Guidelines
Where students do not follow the above guidelines:
1. Students who submit assignments that do not comply with
the guidelines may be required to
resubmit their assignments or incur penalties for inadequate
referencing.
2. Late penalties will apply per day after a student or group
has been notified of resubmission
requirements.
Students whose citations are identified as fictitious will be
reported for academic misconduct.
http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf
Page 5 of 11

2021
Assignment Questions
Part A: Contracts Law Question (20 marks)
● Read the Contracts Law question below.
● In 1,000 words (+/- 10% is allowed), answer your chosen
question using the IRAC method.
● Your answer must be supported by relevant Australian law
and cases decided by Australian courts
(preferably the High Court) and/or scholarly articles. A
minimum of 6 genuine and relevant
references are required for this part of the report.
● The full citations for all sources cited in your answer must be
listed in a Reference list at the end
of your report.
● In addition, any online sources cited in your answer and listed
in your Reference List must include
a valid hyperlink that allows access to the full text of the
source.
Engaged couple Marina and Mark were the winners of a reality

TV show involving racing other couples
around Australia. They decided to use some of the winnings on
their wedding. They checked out a
number of venues and finally decided on the Grand Ballroom at
the Hotel Grand Inquisitor. Marina
and Mark signed a ‘wedding package’ contract with the hotel,
which provided for the following:
● Hire of ballroom - $15,000
● Catering (excluding cake) - $9,000
● Wedding cake (two-tier) - $500
● Honeymoon suite (one night) - $400
● Total - $24,900
The wedding reception was a happy event. However, when it
came to the time to reveal and cut the
cake, Marina and Mark were shocked to learn that earlier in the
day a hotel waitress had clumsily
dropped the specially baked wedding cake, and because there
was no time to prepare another, the
two-tier cake provided by the hotel was in fact two sponge
cakes purchased from the local cake shop.
Despite their disappointment and at the urging of the guests,
Marina and Mark went ahead with the

cake cutting and the cake was eaten.
When the reception finally ended, Marina and Mark retired to
the honeymoon suite. However, they
soon discovered that the hotel was carrying out around-the-
clock renovations to the nearby
presidential suite to cater for an overseas dignitary who had
decided to stay at the hotel. These
renovations made the honeymoon suite vibrate, made incessant
noise all night and led to dust
entering the air-conditioning. Marina and Mark gave up on the
room at 1:00 a.m. and went and
checked into another hotel. On the way out of the hotel, Mark
told the night manager that the night
had been a disaster and that the hotel ‘would not be getting a
cent more out of us’. They also said
they would be talking to their lawyer in the morning.
Advise Marina and Mark:
(a) Whether they were entitled to cancel the contract as they
purported to do (8 marks);
(b) What damages (if any) they are entitled to recover from the
hotel (6 marks);

(c) Whether they are able to recover the $5,000 advance that
they paid the hotel. (6 marks)
Consider the position under common law contract principles
only. DO NOT answer this question
based on Statute Law (such as the Australian Consumer Law.
Page 6 of 11
2021
Part B: Corporations Law question (10 marks)
● Read the questions below on Corporations Law, specifically
Agency.
● In 600 words (+/- 10% is allowed), answer the chosen given
question.
● A minimum of 3 genuine and relevant Australian legal
references are required for this part of the
report. Examples of relevant references for this question include
the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth);
Australian cases; and Australian law textbooks.

of your report.
source.
RJ Booker, a real estate firm based in Milsons Point, Sydney,
emailed Mimi. Mimi had a friend working
at RJ booker and she told her that she wanted to sell her unit.
The unit was located at the 19th floor
of a modern apartment building located in Milson’s Point,
almost beside the entrance to Luna Park.
Gustavo, the franchisee and principal of RJ Booker in Milson’s
Point, asked Mimi if the firm can be
her exclusive agents in the sale of her unit. Gustavo explained
that if they located a qualified buyer,
RJ Booker would be entitled to the standard Real Estate
industry commission rates for agents.
Currently, this was about 3 percent of the purchase price. Mimi
agreed and signed the agency

contract.
Within five days, Gustavo called Mimi and told her that he had
found a buyer for her unit, Alisa. Alisa
had told Gustavo that she was ready to buy Mimi’s unit “as per
contract” and “depending on the result
of a property inspection”. The very next day, Mimi received an
email offer from a third party and she
immediately accepted it without informing RJ Booker. When
Gustavo found out, he insisted that Mimi
should pay them a commission based on the selling price of the
unit, stating that they did their job
and found a good buyer for the unit. Mimi told Gustavo to get
lost and that she will not pay their
commission.
Advice Gustavo on whether Mimi was legally right in not
wanting to pay RJ Booker a commission on
the sale of her unit.

of 11
2021
Part C: Corporations Law question (10 marks)
● Read the questions below on Corporations Law, specifically
on Companies and Incorporated
Associations.
● In 400 words (+/- 10% is allowed), answer the chosen given
question.
● A minimum of 3 genuine and relevant Australian legal
references are required for this part of the
report. Examples of relevant references for this question include
the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth);
the Australian and Securities and Investment Commission’s

(ASIC) website (www.asic.gov.au),
the website of the Australian Business Register’s (ABR) website
(www.abr.gov.au).
of your report.
source.
Gary Olsen, known affectionately as “Gazza” or Gazzarooney”
by his mates, is the Group Head for
Corporate Finance in a boutique investment bank called “DA
Bank Limited”. There is a term in Gazza’s
employment contract, which he signed on 15 February 2020,
providing as follows:
Prohibition on client contact. In the event that your employment
with DA Bank Limited
ceases for whatever reason and howsoever caused, you
explicitly agree and undertake
not to contact clients of DA Bank through whatever means. This

includes contact by
phone, email, mail or any other common means of
communication. This prohibition will
last for 3 years upon the cessation of your employment with the
bank.
Gazza resigns from DA Bank on 1 March 2021. He is later
recruited by his good mate Colin Taggart,
who is the Chief Executive Officer of a merchant bank called
“Tag Bank Limited”. Upon joining, Colin
immediately appoints Gazza to the same position that he held
with DA Bank. Gazza then starts calling
some clients of DA Bank that he had dealt with when he worked
there.
DA Bank now wants to take legal action against Gazza. Explain
to DA Bank the grounds, if any, on
which it can take legal action to stop Gazza from contacting the
bank’s clients.

http://www.asic.gov.au/
Page 8 of 11
2021
Marking Rubric
Group Report
Part A Question
Total marks
available: 20 marks
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory
Identification of
material facts
involved in problem
question
(4 marks)
3.5 to 4 marks
Completely
identifies all
relevant facts of
case
2.5 to 3 marks
Identifies most of
the relevant facts
of case
2 to 2.25 marks
Identifies the
basic relevant
facts of the case
but misses other
relevant facts
Below 2 marks
Does not identify

relevant facts of case
Identification of
legal issues / legal
question and
relevant law
(4 marks)
3.5 to 4 marks
Correctly identifies
all relevant legal
issues and are
stated in the form
of questions.
relevant and
appropriate legal
rules and case law,
and states them in
the form of
statements
2.5 to 3 marks
Issues correctly
identified, but
may contain
extraneous
information and
are not stated in
the form of
questions.

Legal rules and
case law correctly
identified, but
may contain
extraneous info
and are not in the
form of
statements.
2 to 2.25 marks
Issues are not
completely
identified.
Legal rules and
case law not
correctly
identified.
Below 2 marks
Identifies incorrect or
irrelevant issues.
irrelevant legal rules
and case law.
Thorough yet
succinct application
of law to material
facts
(6 marks)

5 to 6 marks
facts; well-
reasoned
discussion relating
facts to the rules
and case law.
3.5 to 4.5 marks
Correctly
identifies facts.
Not well
reasoned.
2.5 to 3 marks
Facts not correctly
identified.
Analysis
incoherent.
Below 2 marks
Scant to no analysis.
Citation and
referencing
(including minimum
number of
references)
(3 marks)
2.5 to 3 marks

Correctly cites
minimum of 6
references, in-text
and in reference
list.
1.75 to 2.25
marks
Has minimum of 6
references; or has
occasional errors
in formatting of
in-text citations
and reference list
1 to 1.5 marks
Does not have
minimum of 6
references or
contains errors in
formatting of in-
text citations and
reference list
Below 1 mark
No referencing either
in-text or in reference
list; or cites
inappropriate
references; or all
references not cited in
the correct format.

of 11
2021
Professional quality
including language
use and writing
style
(3 marks)
2.5 to 3 marks
Professional
language. No
grammatical,
punctuation or
spelling errors.
1.75 to 2.25
marks
Some mistakes.
Does not detract
from
understanding.
1 to 1.5 marks
Many mistakes.
Detracts from
understanding.

Sloppy.
Below 1 mark
Reflects no real effort.
Deductions
Excess word count
(1 mark for every
25 words over)
Under the word
limit (1 mark for
every 25 word
under)
Lacks minimum of 6
references (1 mark
for every missing
reference)
Page 10 of 11
2021
Part B and Part C Questions

Total marks
available: 10 marks
per question
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Identification of
material facts
involved in problem
question
(2 marks)
1.75 to 2 marks
Completely
identifies all
relevant facts of
case
1.5 mark
Identifies most of
the relevant facts
of case

1 mark
Identifies the
basic relevant
facts of the case
but misses other
relevant facts
Below 1 mark
Does not identify
relevant facts of case
Identification of
legal issues / legal
question and
relevant law
(2 marks)
1.75 to 2 marks
all relevant legal
issues and are
stated in the form
of questions.
relevant and
appropriate legal
rules and case law,
and states them in
the form of
statements

1.5 mark
Issues correctly
identified, but
may contain
extraneous
information and
are not stated in
the form of
questions.
Legal rules and
case law correctly
identified, but
may contain
extraneous info
and are not in the
form of
statements.
1 mark
Issues are not
completely
identified.
Legal rules and
case law not
correctly
identified.
Below 1 mark
irrelevant issues.

irrelevant legal rules
and case law.
Thorough yet
succinct application
of law to material
facts
(3 marks)
2.5 to 3 marks
facts; well-
reasoned
discussion relating
facts to the rules
and case law.
1.75 to 2.25
marks
Correctly
identifies facts.
Not well
reasoned.
1 to 1.5 marks
Facts not correctly
identified.
Analysis
incoherent.

Below 1 mark
Scant to no analysis.
Citation and
referencing
(including minimum
number of
references)
(2 marks)
1.75 to 2 marks
Correctly cites
minimum of 6
references, in-text
and in reference
list.
1.5 mark
Has minimum of 6
references; or has
occasional errors
in formatting of
in-text citations
and reference list
1 mark
Does not have
minimum of 6
references or
contains errors in
formatting of in-

text citations and
reference list
Below 1 mark
No referencing either
in-text or in reference
list; or cites
inappropriate
references; or all
references not cited in
the correct format.
Page 11 of 11
2021
Professional quality
including language
use and writing
style
(1 mark)
1 mark
Professional
language. No
grammatical,
punctuation or

spelling errors.
0.75 mark
Some mistakes.
Does not detract
from
understanding.
0.5 mark
Many mistakes.
Detracts from
understanding.
Sloppy.
Below 0.5 mark
Reflects no real effort.
Deductions
Excess word count
(1 mark for every
25 words over)
Under the word
limit (1 mark for
every 25 word
under)
Lacks minimum of 3
references (1 mark
for every missing
reference)

HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

Similar to HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION (16)

More from MargaritoWhitt221

More from MargaritoWhitt221 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION