Essay (Legal Problem) Assessment – 20% Due: Monday 2nd September before 5 pm. Submit via link on vUWS (Turnitin). Students are only allowed one submission via Turnitin. Make sure you upload your final version. This is an exercise in legal problem solving. This assessment task covers material taught in Contracts I and II only. Assessment tasks exist to help students learn and apply their knowledge. Grades exist to show how fully this goal is attained. This assessment task must be the student’s own understanding and effort. If the words or ideas used are not your own, then you must correctly reference them. This is a compulsory assessment task. The exam is expected to take about 2 hours of intensive writing to complete. The allocated time for completion is intended to take into account students’ other commitments. This also allows you time to reflect upon your answer and ensure your referencing, grammar etc is correct. Accordingly, requests for extensions will only be considered in the most extraordinary circumstances. If you make such a request, you must attach all work done to date on the problems to your email, otherwise it will be automatically declined and you will then need to file an application for special consideration. Late penalties will apply to a submission made after the due date without an extension – 10% of total marks per day or part thereof. You should upload your completed work as soon as you are able, without waiting for an email from the unit coordinator granting or declining an extension or for an outcome on your special consideration application. A deferred assessment task might be granted as a result of your application for special consideration. If so, it will take the form of a 2 hour supervised exam. This is regardless of whether you uploaded an answer to these problems. This assessment task is designed to address student learning outcomes 1–3 for the unit: ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS: Before submitting your assignment, it should be spell-checked and read aloud to check for grammatical errors and/or run through the grammar-checking tool in MS Word. All references must be in Harvard/WesternSydU, available free via the Library website. • Answer all questions. • Word limit: 1500 words, excluding your Reference List. This is a strict word count, no +10% permitted. The penalty for exceeding the word limit is 1 mark per 100 words or part thereof. • Do not attach a cover sheet, as this is built into the Turnitin system. All this will do is impact upon your Originality Report, your word count and your privacy. • Format: Double spaced, Arial 12 point, MS Word document. If you do not use a Word document we will not be able to view and mark it. Please note you can download the MSWord App for iPads free via App Store. • If you have a question about this assessment task, please read the Learning Guide and these instructions, before posting a question to the Discussion Board on vUWS. Do not email the unit coordinator unless your enquiry is of a personal nature. Using the Discussion Board means that every student has the benefit of access to the answer to questions about the assessment task, which is a fairer system for everyone. Do NOT post your actual responses to any of the questions, as this may involve you in possible academic misconduct. QUESTIONS: There are two questions in this assessment task. Students must answer both questions. Students should note question 2 has four parts to it. Two marks are specifically set aside for English expression and referencing in your answer. This is negatively marked, that is you will lose ½ mark for each error up to a maximum loss of 2 marks. Make reference in your answers to relevant cases and sections of relevant legislation, when appropriate. Question 1: 6 marks Frank was concerned about the heavy drinking habits of his favourite nephew, Nick. So, in June, in an effort to break Nick of his routine drinking, Frank offered to pay Nick $1,000 if Nick abstained from alcohol for one month starting on 1 July. Nick had himself become concerned for his health and just before his uncle’s proposal, had joined Alcoholics Anonymous (‘AA’). As one of the conditions for membership of the AA group, Nick had signed a document promising to use his best efforts to abstain from alcohol. Nick did not drink alcohol at all during the month of July. He admits that this was more out of concern for his health and the promise to the AA group than any thought of financial reward. However, he nonetheless wants to know the legal position with respect to any claim against his uncle for the $1,000. Advise Nick fully as to whether he has a binding contract with Frank. Question 2: Donald and Hugh were both members of gemstone clubs. They met at a meeting. Hugh had a stand with the sign: For Sale: Mixed Gemstones at Marked Prices Donald was looking for a stone suitable for setting in a ring. He selected a stone priced $450.00 and purchased it from Hugh. The stone Donald purchased was later identified as a topaz. Donald wishes to return the stone to Hugh and claim his money back. Discuss Donald’s rights and the legal implications of each of the following possible situations. a. Although there was no discussion, both Donald and Hugh believed it was a rough diamond. (3 marks) b. Donald believed the stone was a rough diamond but did not discuss his belief with Hugh, who knew it was a topaz. (3 marks) c. Donald told Hugh he was pleased to find a diamond. Hugh did not correct him. (2 marks) d. Hugh was the club’s expert on diamonds and offered the stone to Donald assuring him that it was a diamond, as he honestly believed it to be. (4 marks) Marking guidelines, as set out in the LG: Students are assessed against the standards below. Your work will be given a mark corresponding with one of the following grades. The criteria specified should be considered as a guide. It is not exhaustive and an answer that is exceptional in one area may be given a higher grade because of this reason and vice versa. Marking criteria and standards (pages 9 and 10 of the Learning Guide): Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Unsatisfactory Identification of legal issues: What parts of the questions raise legal issues for business people, and what are those issues? All issues correctly identified, including difficult advanced aspects. All central / main issues correctly identified and consideration given to some more difficult aspects. All central / main issues correctly identified; no incorrect issues. Most issues correctly identified; few if any incorrect issues. Some issues Correctly identified but not enough for a pass; significant incorrect issues. Knowledge of topic content: Have you explained the relevant legal principles and tests? Have you cited any authorities? Thorough knowledge and understanding of the subject content, full coverage of principles and tests, including those raised by more difficult aspects of the question. Legal authorities should be used accurately at this level. Considerable knowledge and understanding of the topic with thorough coverage of principles and tests, with some raised by more difficult aspects of the question. Some legal authorities should be cited (accurately). Reasonably comprehensive knowledge of the content, including the relevant principles and tests. Some legal authorities may be cited (accurately). Sound work with reasonable knowledge of the topic, and a secure understanding of the basic principles and tests. Demonstrates some knowledge of subject but there are also some errors, gaps or signs of confusion, such that a pass is not warranted. Application of legal principles and tests to the facts of the problem. Are you identifying connections and using evidence in making well-formulated arguments? Are you identifying alternative solutions? Answer applies the principles to the facts of the question in a highly convincing manner with unusually insightful responses. Very good critical thinking and problem solving skills. Answer clearly applies the principles to the facts to produce a convincing overall argument. Good critical thinking and problem solving skills. Answer goes beyond a standard answer in terms of its application. There is evidence of critical thinking and problem solving skills. Reasonable standard of application. Some critical thinking is evident and some attempt at problem solving. Some application, but not enough for a pass. Little critical thinking and little problem solving. Quality of English writing. Are you using discipline appropriate, effective written communication skills? Answer is of a very high standard in terms of expression. Appropriate and effective referencing. A high quality answer in terms of written expression -no grammatical or other errors should be present at this level. Appropriate and effective referencing most of the time. Above average standard of written expression. Meaning can easily be understood throughout the answer. Referencing when needed although some errors. Acceptable standard of written expression. Meaning fairly clear and able to be understood throughout the answer. Referencing when needed although with errors. Standard of written expression should be improved; meaning of s some responses or sections not clear. Either no referencing when needed or ncorrect referencing. END OF MATERIALS.