LAW1500 S3 2022 Problem-Based Essay Description Total Marks Overall Weighting Word Limit Due Date Essay 40 40% 2000 words 4 January 2023 at 23:55 AEST Instructions Using IRAC (issue-rule-application-conclusion) method, please answer the three questions below. In seeking to identify the relevant legal issue(s) within these questions, please refer to chapters 5, 6 and 7 of the required textbook in the first instance. Students are welcome to engage in some independent legal research to provide additional support for their answers, but students are not required to do so. In either case, the textbook should be your starting point. Pay careful attention to the final sentence or paragraph in each question. What are the key terms used? Review the sections of the textbook that deal with this term(s). When you are familiar with the area of law, consider what legal issue(s) exist based on the facts. Do not use the words ‘Issue’, ‘Rule’, ‘Application’ as headings or subheadings in your answer. Do not rely upon the Australian Consumer Law. The Assessment Moodle book on StudyDesk contains useful information regarding the preparation and submission of problem-based essay questions. Question 1 (10 marks) Lake Perseverance Fishing Club placed the following advertisement in a local newspaper on 25 January: Come one, come all! Fishermen and women of Lake Perseverance. We are offering to pay $100,000 to any person who catches Lord Charles, a Mary River Cod which we have tagged and released into the lake. The following day was the Australia Day holiday. Lake Perseverance was crowded with people fishing both from the bank and from boats. At about lunch time a rumor spread along the people on the bank that there had been an error in the advertisement and that the true prize amount should have been $1,000 and that the Lake Perseverance Fishing Club had announced that the prize would be the lower amount. The rumor was in fact true. Garry heard the rumor from the stranger fishing beside him minutes before catching Lord Charles. A Lake Perseverance Fishing Club representative was on hand to certify the catch before Lord Charles was released back into the lake but did not say anything about the prize amount. Garry is claiming the Lake Perseverance Fishing Club owed him $100,000. The Lake Perseverance Fishing Club is refusing to pay $100,000 in prize money. Advise Garry whether he can enforce payment of the $100,000 prize money. Question 2 (10 marks) Karen is a self-employed interior designer in Brisbane, Queensland. Karen purchased a purpose-built computer for her business from Michael at Computers R Us Pty Ltd (‘Computers R Us’) in March 2022. In April 2022, Karen accidentally spills hot coffee on her new computer and the computer immediately stops working. Karen took the computer back to Computers R Us in April 2022. Michael says that the repairs will cost $1500. Karen agrees to the repairs. While her computer is being fixed, Karen gets a call from Jim who asks Karen to redesign his 10-storey commercial premise. This is a very lucrative opportunity for Karen. However, the redesign must be completed within 2 weeks otherwise Jim will take his business elsewhere. Karen agrees to the tight timeline. Karen immediately calls Michael to ask when the computer will be repaired and explains the situation with Jim. Michael explains that the repair work is more extensive and expensive than he originally quoted. The repairs will now cost $3000. If Karen agrees to the increased price, Michael can have the computer fixed within two days. Karen is furious and feels like Michael is taking advantage of the situation. Reluctantly, Karen agrees to the increase cost of repairs. Karen gets her computer back in 2 days and completes the redesign work for Jim. Karen wants to know if the contract with Michael could be unenforceable. Advise Karen. Question 3: (10 marks) Andrew is the Director of Custom Boards Pty Ltd (‘Custom Boards’) in Burleigh Heads, Queensland. Over decades, Custom Boards has developed an international reputation for manufacturing high quality surfboards. In June 2022, Andrew decided the time was right to sell Custom Boards. Daphne has been a long-term customer of Custom Boards and when Daphne heard that Custom Boards was for sale she was immediately interested in purchasing the business. The next day Daphne hands Andrew a contract for the sale of Custom Boards. To protect her investment, Daphne included a term in the contract that would prevent Andrew from opening another surfboard manufacturing business anywhere in the world for 25 years. Andrew and Daphne sign the contract. Andrew quickly becomes bored in retirement and wants to know whether there is any way he can set up a new surfboard manufacturing business. Advise Andrew. Assessment Rubric # HD (40-34) A (33-30) B (29-26) C (25-20) F (15-0) Question 1 25% Correctly identified the key issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. A highly effective use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion. (10-8.3) Correctly identified the key issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. An effective use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion (8.3-7.2) Identified a relevant issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. Some use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion. (7.3-6.3) Identified a relevant legal issue(s). An accurate statement of the relevant legal rule(s). A limited use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A conclusion that directly addresses the legal issue. (6.3-4.97) Identified an irrelevant legal issue(s) or failed to articulate any legal issue(s). An incorrect understanding and/or reliance on a legal rule(s). No use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. No conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue. (4.97-0.0) Question 2 25% Correctly identified the key issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. A highly effective use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion. (10-8.3) Correctly identified the key issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. An effective use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion. (8.3–7.3) Identified a relevant issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. Some use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion. (7.3–6.3) Identified a relevant legal issue(s). An accurate statement of the relevant legal rule(s). A limited use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A conclusion that directly addresses the legal issue. (6.3-4.97) Identified an irrelevant legal issue(s) or failed to articulate any legal issue(s). An incorrect understanding and/or reliance on a legal rule(s). No use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. No conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue. (4.97-0.0) Question 3 25% Correctly identified the key issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. A highly effective use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion. (10-8.3) Correctly identified the key issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. An effective use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion. (8.3–7.3) Identified a relevant issue(s), making reference to the applicable legal principle or concept. An accurate and sufficiently detailed description of the relevant legal rule(s) stated largely in the author’s own words. Some use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A clear and concise conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue, including a brief summary of the most pertinent reasons for the conclusion. (7.3–6.3) Identified a relevant legal issue(s). An accurate statement of the relevant legal rule(s). A limited use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. A conclusion that directly addresses the legal issue. (6.3-4.97) Identified an irrelevant legal issue(s) or failed to articulate any legal issue(s). An incorrect understanding and/or reliance on a legal rule(s). No use of the facts to argue for or against the application of a legal principle or concept. No conclusion that directly addresses the previously identified legal issue. (4.97-0.0) Written communication Research Referencing 25% Highly effective and professional writing style. Excellent use of spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Very few errors. Evidence of a high level of original research which enhances application and analysis. All primary and secondary sources are referenced according to Harvard (AGPS) or the AGLC citation styles with very few errors. (10-8.3) Effective and professional writing style. Few errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Evidence of a high level of original research. All primary and secondary sources are referenced according to Harvard (AGPS) or the AGLC citation styles with few errors. (8.3–7.3) Effective and professional writing style. Some errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Evidence of original research from a number of different sources. All primary and secondary sources are referenced according to Harvard (AGPS) or the AGLC citation styles with some errors. (7.3–6.3) Numerous errors in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation. Evidence of some original research. All primary and secondary sources are referenced according to Harvard (AGPS) or the AGLC citation styles with many errors. (6.3-4.97) Comprehension difficult. Very many errors in spelling, punctuation and/or grammar. Little or no evidence of original research One or more primary and secondary sources are not referenced according to Harvard (AGPS) or the AGLC citation styles. This includes failing to attribute a quote to an author, with or without quotation marks. In addition to the reduction in marks, submissions that fall into this category may be referred to the USQ School of Law and Justice Academic Integrity Officer. (4.97-0.0)