HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester T1 2019
Unit Code HI6027
Unit Title Business and Corporate Law
Assessment Type Group Assignment
Assessment Title Case Studies of Business 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 two 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:
- Assess the obligations, rights and remedies available to parties in particular commercial relationships. (ULO 3)
- Critically examine the foundations of Australian company law. (ULO 4)
- Critically discuss and apply contract and tort law in business circumstances. (ULO 5) - Critically discuss and apply the legal framework that regulates a company’s dealings with outsiders. (ULO 7)
Weight 20 % of the total assessments
Total Marks 20
Word limit Group Written Report of maximum 2,000 words and a 10 minute presentation
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 Harvard referencing style.
HI6027 Business and Corporate Law Group Assignment T1 2019
Assignment Specifications
Purpose:
The Group Assignment aims to provide students with an opportunity to work in a collaborative environment in solving two 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 3 and a maximum of 5 students per group. The assignment consists of 2 parts: a 2,000 words written report and an 8-10 minutes (maximum) in-class or video presentation.
Instructions: Please read and re-read carefully to avoid mistakes.
Group Report
1. This group assignment consists of 2 parts. Part A is a case study on contract law, and Part B is a question involving Corporations Law. Both questions must be answered.
2. The total word limit for the group report is 2,000 words (+/- 10% allowed) with each part having a maximum word count of 1,000 words. Word count limits are strictly enforced. A deduction of 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.
3. 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.
4. The group report is worth 10% of total marks for this assignment.
5. Each group must submit a draft of their report on Blackboard according to the due dates below. If a draft is not submitted, the final report will not be marked.
• by week 8 if class is in the normal mode
• by week 4 if class is in block mode 1
• by week 9 is class is in block mode 2
Part A: Contract Law Question
i. Refer to the prescribed textbook: Fitzpatrick J, Symes C, Veljanovski A & Parker D, Business and Corporations Law 3rd ed. (2017), LexisNexis Butterworths Australia.
ii. From Part 1 - Business, Chapters 2 to 6 on Contract Law, refer to the Problem Questions at the end of the chapter and choose one (1) question. Note: it must be a case problemtype question and not a short answer question.
iii. You must send your lecturer the number of your question and the page on which it appears for approval. Do not start work on a question without obtaining your lecturer’s prior approval.
iv. In not more than 1,000 words, answer your chosen legal case question using the IRAC method.
v. Your answer must be supported by relevant law and cases decided by Australian courts (preferably the High Court) and/or scholarly articles. A minimum of 3 references are required for this part of the report.
vi. Your references must be listed in a Reference list at the end of the Part A question.
Part B: Corporations Law Questions
i. Again, refer to Business and Corporations Law 3rd edition by Fitzpatrick et al.
ii. This time, refer to Part 2 - Corporations, Chapters 7 to 10 on Corporations. Refer to the Problem Questions at the end of the chapter and choose one (1) question. Note: it must be a case problem-type question and not a short answer question.
iii. You must send your lecturer the number of your question and the page on which it appears for approval. Do not start work on a question without obtaining your lecturer’s prior approval.
iv. In not more than 1,000 words, answer your chosen legal case question using the IRAC method.
v. Your answer must be supported by relevant law and cases decided by Australian courts (preferably the High Court) and/or scholarly articles. A minimum of 3 references are required for this part of the report.
vi. Your references must be listed in a Reference list at the end of the Part B question.
Group Presentation
1. Summarise your answers for Parts A and B of the group report.
2. Present and discuss the summary of your answers in 10 minutes (5 minutes for each part).
3. The Presentation will be done in class or video recording. Your lecturer will advise which is more appropriate.
• Whether in-class or video presentation, all members must present. The group will be marked down if not all members present.
4. Video link must be uploaded to a publicly-viewable video sharing platform (ex. Youtube, Dropbox, Google drive) and the video link uploaded on Blackboard.
5. A video presentation consists of both images and audio. For this reason, a plain Power Point presentation showing slides even with accompanying voice recording is not considered a video and, hence, not allowed.
6. The group presentation is worth 10% of total marks for this assignment.
Important Reminders:
• You must email your lecturer your list of group members and chosen questions by week 4.
• You must obtain approval by email from your lecturer of your group and chosen questions before starting work on it. Please note: failure to obtain lecturer approval will result in a failing mark for the entire group for the group assignment.
• 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.
• Please fill in the “Rubric Group Report” sheet (available in Blackboard under “Assignments and Due dates) and attach as a cover sheet to your group report and upload on Blackboard.
• Each team member also must also submit to their lecturer a “Peer Evaluation of Individual Participation in Group Assignment” sheet (available in Blackboard under “Assignments and Due dates) with their presentation/video.
• No submission of either the group report or video presentation link on Blackboard/SafeAssign (if doing a video presentation) is equivalent to non-submission, which will merit a mark of 0 (zero) for the group assignment.
• GROUPS OF LESS THAN 3 AND MORE THAN 5 PEOPLE WILL RECEIVE A PENALTY OF 10 marks (50%).
• 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).
• All reports are expected to observe proper referencing in accordance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (AGLC). A copy of the AGLC may be read online for free via this link:
https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/2877782/AGLC3.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.
Marking criteria
Marking criteria Weighting (%)
Group Report
- Identification of material facts involved in problem question 2%
- Identification of legal issues / legal question and relevant law 2%
- Thorough yet succinct application of law to material facts 3%
- Citation and referencing 1.5%
- Presentation 1.5%
Presentation
- Group member participation and division of parts 1.5%
- Depth of analysis and evidence of understanding of the issues presented and critical thinking in answers 4%
- Level of professionalism in presentation 3%
- Overall clarity of presentation 1.5%
TOTAL Weight 20%
Marking Rubric
Group Report
Total marks available: 10 marks Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Identification of material facts involved in problem question
2 marks 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 2 marks
Correctly identifies all relevant legal issues and are stated in the form of questions.
Correctly identifies 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
Issue are not completely identified.
Legal rules and case law not correctly identified. Below 1 mark
Identifies incorrect or irrelevant issues.
Identifies incorrect or irrelevant legal rules and case law.
Thorough yet succinct application of law to material
facts
3 marks 3 marks
Correctly identifies facts; wellreasoned discussion relating facts to the rules and case law. 2.5 to 2 marks
Correctly identifies facts. Not well reasoned. 1.5 mark
Facts not correctly identified. Analysis incoherent. Below 1.5 mark
No analysis.
Citation and referencing
(including minimum number of
references)
1.5 marks 1.5 marks
Correctly cites minimum of 6 references, in-text and in reference list. 1 mark
Has minimum of 6 references; or has occasional errors in formatting of in-text citations and reference list 0.75 mark
Does not have minimum of 6 references or contains errors in formatting of intext citations and reference list Below 0.75 mark
No referencing either
in-text or in reference list; or
cites inappropriate references; or all references not cited in the correct format.
Presentation
1.5 marks
1.5 marks
Professional language. No grammatical, punctuation or spelling errors. 1 mark
Some mistakes. Does not detract from understanding. 0.75 mark
Many mistakes. Detracts from understanding.
Sloppy. Below 0.75 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)
Group Presentation
Total marks
available: 10 Excellent Very Good Good Unsatisfactory
Group member
participation and
division of parts
1.5 marks 1.5 marks
All group members presented and presentation is equally divided among group members; presentation shows an excellent level of effort 1 mark
All group
members presented but presentation is not equally divided among group members; presentation shows a high level of effort 0.75 mark
Not all group members
presented or presentation is not equally divided among group members; but presentation shows average effort. Below 0.75 mark
Not all group members presented and presentation does not show real effort.
Depth of analysis and evidence of understanding of the issues
presented and
critical thinking in
answers
4 marks 4 marks
Displays in-depth analysis and evidence of strong understanding of the issues
presented and
critical thinking in answers. 3.5 to 3.0 marks
Displays strong analysis and understanding of the issues
presented and
critical thinking in answers. 2.5 to 2.0 marks
Shows acceptable
level of analysis and understanding of the issues. Below 2 marks
Does not show acceptable level of analysis and understanding of the issues; merely reads from prepared answers.
Level of professionalism in presentation (including members in appropriate business attire; and
use of visual aids)
3 marks 3 marks
High-level of professionalism in presentation 2 marks
Above average
level of professionalism in presentation 1.5 marks
Average level of professionalism in presentation Below 1.5 marks
Below average level of professionalism in presentation
Overall clarity of
presentation
1.5 marks 1.5 marks
Extremely clear, succinct presentation 1 mark
High level of clarity and succinctness of presentation 0.75 mark
Average level of clarity and succinctness of presentation Below 0.75 mark
Below average level of clarity and succinctness of presentation