This essay will discuss the issues extracted from the case and give suggestions to Rosie and Frank. The analysis will be based on Australian Business Law and divided into two main parts for different characters in this case. Firstly, issues and recommendation relevant to Rosie will be explained. The first main issue for Rosie is the University of Cheshire’s breach of their contract. The existence of the contract between Rosie and the University of Cheshire can be proved at first. Allan had sent Rosie a letter that ensured Rosie’s appointment of a lecturer in his university and attached her acceptance with the teaching arrangement. This letter also had an exclusion clause that stated the classes would be cancelled without enough enrolment. …show more content…
Under the ACL s 29, if a false or misleading representation is made by a business, this business may be sued for damage by anyone such as customers. The ACL prohibits the representation that is the false or misleading description of the “quality” of goods. “Quality” can refer to special features or the nature of goods. In this case, Big Whale advertised its seafood as “Product of Australia”, this advertisement was used to indicate that their raw materials were from Australia. However, with the result of the investigation, the frozen salmon they used were transported to Sydney. There was no evidence to prove its raw materials were originally from Australia. As a result, Big Whale made a misleading representation about the quality of its goods, this was a breach of the ACL. According to the remedies under the ACL, Rosie may ask the regulator to give Big Whale adverse publicity order to correct its advertisement and require compensation for its misleading …show more content…
Based on the standard to assess the contract terms, if a party of a standard form contract is forced by another party to accept or refuse the terms of this contract, these terms can be treated as unfair contract terms. From this case, Big Whale required Rosie to pay in advance with credit card. Additionally, she also asked to pay a surcharge to ensure the delivery on time. Rosie had no choice but to adopt these requests because she had to arrange the lunch in a hurry. But these requests damaged Rosie’s right to be treated fairly in trade. Because contract terms, in this case, caused an obvious imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations under the contract , there is evidence of the unfair contract terms. Hence, the regulator ACCC can have a declaration of these unfair contract terms from the court and the party who utilise these terms was in breach of ACL. Consequently, Rosie can sue Big Whale for her right. According to the ACL, she can have a compensation order to acquire the refund of her
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
The decision in Equuscorp is significant, as it has made clear several principles that were once ambiguous under Australian law. It ratifies that restitutionary remedies are unavailable for a claim for money had and received where recovery would reduce coherence in the law. Furthermore, Equuscorp has confirmed that a bare cause of action can be assigned where the assignee has a genuine commercial interest in its enforcement.
The Australian legal system, through the process of law reform, aims to keep the nation a safe which, to a significant extent, is effective in creating a more just society. The Law reform, is the process of introducing changes to existing laws in the legal system. In order to suit contemporary society, laws are improved to in which reflects societal values and thus, accommodate the needs of majority of Australia. However, there are instances where the legal system may not be as effective in these changes. Issue such as the native title, marriage equality and the lock out laws cases can justify whether the law reform is effective.
Over the years, different jurisdictions had built their specific system of rules of conduct to govern behaviour. These legal systems, influenced by historical and cultural roots, can be distinguished in two families, the Civil law and the Common law legal systems. The distinctions lies in the process in which each decision is make by the judge and on the legal sources that shapes the law. Indeed, by contrast to the Common law system, which is largely based on Precedents, meaning the decisions that have already been made by judges in similar cases, the Civil law system is based on legislator’s decisions and legal codes with which judges have to justify their judgment . Consequently, instead of referencing to concepts and rules
My paper will show the ethical value in making a decision, right or wrong, that the ultimate result is, I’ll say money. This paper illustrates my opinion in why Harry Stonecipher should have been forced to resign, to save the company name so to say. I’ll talk about the utilitarian and deontological considerations for both parties involved and explain why this decision must have been hard to make.
Mallor, J. P., Barnes, A. J., Bowers, L. T., & Langvardt, A. W. (2013). Business law: The
Laws are rules laid down on all members of a society and enforced by a sovereign political power. Legislation must continually adapt to the changing morals and values of a nation and as such, law reforms are necessary to ensure laws are current, correct defects and fix injustices of law. Agencies of reform such as The Australian Law Reform Commission, are able to investigate and recommend changes to law in order in order to keep up with continuously altering social ethics.This can be seen through the moderately successful modification of laws regarding youth offenders and domestic violence.
The main purpose of this Essay is to advise the parties as to any potential liability in tort and under the protection from Harassment Act 1997, also to find out the particulars of the case and list the points that are necessary in order for someone be found guilty.
Even though consumers have great protection rights in Australian Customer Law, they have to understand that this law is designed to provide consumers and sellers a fair go. Therefore, consumers also have to be aware that they will not be protected if they are careless and make unreasonable demands.
Australia, commercially would be at an advantage if contract law was codified. The common law system which contracts calls home, can only take on so many avenues and limits itself when stretched to cover new areas. There needs to be a national set of laws governing contracts on the commercial front and in general areas to overcome discrepancies across borders. However there still remains inconsistency with consumers, minors and business trade through contracts made online. The digital economy is not only one of the fastest growing areas but is forever changing and is definitely a prospect that needs to be covered. Effective legal safeguards against undue exploitation and advantage-taking in such online dealings would see Australian contract law remain in the global arena. The Australian public need greater stability and certainty from contract law, and codification is a step towards fulfilling that void by allowing citizens to be well equipped and educated on their rights and decisions.
The scenario I have been given highlights the main complexity of contract law. It touches on issues such as unilateral contracts, revocation as well as advertisement. I will be advising Mick (claimant) answering: Whether Yummy chocolate is liable to give a year supply of chocolate as advertised?
As a consequence of the separate legal entity and limited liability doctrines within the UK’s unitary based system, company law had to develop responses to the ‘agency costs’ that arose. The central response is directors’ duties; these are owed by the directors to the company and operate as a counterbalance to the vast scope of powers given to the board. The benefit of the unitary board system is reflected in the efficiency gains it brings, however the disadvantage is clear, the directors may act to further their own interests to the detriment of the company. It is evident within executive remuneration that directors are placed in a stark conflict of interest position in that they may disproportionately reward themselves. The counterbalance to this concern is S175 Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) this acts to prevent certain conflicts arising and punishes directors who find themselves in this position. Furthermore, there are specific provisions within the CA 2006 that empower third parties such as shareholders to influence directors’ remuneration.
This legislation does not prevent dismissals from occurring but only allows the employee to challenge their dismissal. The Unfair Dismissals Act 1977-2007 is the legislation that covers the basis for Alfie’s case. In his case, he seeks to prove that his dismissal was unfair and unwarranted. Thereby seeking redress from his employee. Many aspects of his case are pertinent to the Acts as the facts indicate.