Reference no: EM131232587 , Length:

Word Length: A total of 1800 words being 800 for the problem that is Assignment 2 plus an essay as detailed below of 1,000 words that is Assignment 3.

Conciseness of expression is important in answering these assignments, so please don't exceed the word limit! All sources (e.g. Barron) must be fully acknowledged in footnotes and a bibliography must be used. A failure to adequately reference sources, or to include a Bibliography, amounts to plagiarism and will result in a "Fail" grade for that assignment. Use the "Business Law Style Guide" issued with the Study Guide.

You may if you wish submit Assignment 2 answer as part of a group: In such case please:

- select your own group of 2 or 3 people (no more!)

- all members of the group should sign their own cover sheet (including plagiarism declaration) and all cover sheets should be stapled in alphabetical family name order to the front of the assignment

- lodge ONE COPY ONLY of the Assignment 2 on TurnItIn and make it clear if you are group member who the lodging person was!

- one mark will be allocated for the assignment and this will be the mark assigned to each member

- group management issues are the responsibility of the members of the group and not the teaching staff

- if you have trouble locating others who might like to work in a group with you, use FLO's discussion board to nominate your interest and locate others who might live near you or otherwise be likely candidates to work with you.

Assignment - Problem Question

Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd (GU) owns the Royal Glen Golf course at Glenelg in South Australia which was the site for the Australian Golf Championship last September. The Australian Golf Championship is a very prestigious event in the international golfing calendar. Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd are keen to impress the Professional Golfing Union (PGU) as it usually means that the course is recommended for further high profile and profitable events.

As preparations are underway for the championship the course is undergoing renovations. These included the installation of a major new landscaping and irrigation works to ensure that the grassed areas are perfect at the course. Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd engaged We Do Golf Pty Ltd (WDG) as the contractor to undertake the works. It is a small, but high profile, contract for WDG who are engaged to plant vegetation in June last and to install the irrigation system in September a month before the championship is due to be held. The contract value including materials was $12,000. WGT are informed that the work is required to be finished well ahead of the championship. WGT saw the publicity it would receive as being worth the extra resources required to do the job in that timeframe.

WGT starts the work and plant fast growing shrubs at strategic points on the golf course completing that part of the work ahead of time but there is a delay in the importation of the piping system from Germany so that the work is not finished before the publicity shots promoting the event to the various international television networks telecasting the championship. Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd are seriously embarrassed and want to cancel the contract but as the event was then due in a few days they let WDG finish the installation.

To complete the installation WGD used a locally sourced piping system manufactured by a small company in Wingfield, Adelaide. The work was completed on time.

A week ahead of the championship leaks appeared in the piping that saw flooding over a third of the golf course and indeed killed many of the new plants by over watering. Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd say that they had no alternative but to move the championship to the nearby Morphettville golf course where it was completed. Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd suffered badly in the media and the PGU were not impressed with the championship's organisation at all.

Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd incurred a number of losses as a result of the flooding. These included losses as a result of: -

1 relocating the event to the Morphettville course being $50,000;
2 repairing the piping that caused the flooding being $12,000;
3 rebuilding the flooded course including replanting of $16,000;
4 refunding membership fees for the lost use of the course for 3 weeks;
and further
5 the cancellation of 2 tournaments scheduled for January and May next year which had been scheduled; and
6 the loss of the expected benefits that would have flowed from a favourable report from the PGU.

WDG have informed Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd that the costs of replacing the faulty piping and the plants is only $12,000 and that that is all that they are prepared to pay. They maintain that if they were informed of the leak as soon as it was discovered and not 3 days after it occurred the losses would have been limited to that amount only. In any event the total amount of the contract was only $12,000 so they are prepared to refund the amount as a goodwill gesture!

Which of Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd's losses are recoverable? Give detailed reasons.

Assignment - Essay question

The Essay must be done individually and NOT in a group. Use a separate cover sheet.

Students will need to do some research to complete this essay. Professional journals that may be assessed through the University library are a good starting point as are texts on Auditing and ethics in accounting practice.

This is a law topic so you must consider the legal aspects of the question not the accounting aspects.

Also please do not forget to use the Business Law Style Guide that was attached to the Topic Study Guide 2016. All sources (e.g. Ciro&Symes) must be fully acknowledged in footnotes and a bibliography must be used. A failure to adequately reference sources, or to include a Bibliography, amounts to plagiarism and will result in a "Fail" grade for that assignment.

All assignments must be submitted through FLOand TurnItIn is ruthless in identifying any copied texts or shared answers!

The Essay Subject choices are set out below. Students may choose any one (1) from the four (4) questions following:

1. Explain how the independence test applies for former auditors and accountants joining company boards? Refer to appropriate statutory provisions as required.

OR

2. Discuss whether the present law of mandatory rotation of audit firms is working adequately, and in your discussion describe the present statutory requirements. Refer to any empirical data and appropriately reference it.

OR

3. Discuss why Australia is one of the few jurisdictions where auditing standards have the force of law (by way of an Act of Parliament, the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)).

Assignment 2

In case of the situation of the breach of contract, following elements should be considered before the establishment of the recovery of the damages:

- There should be condition of the breach of contract
- Defendant's actions have caused any kind of loss to the Plaintiff, especially the financial.
- The loss suffered by the plaintiff is not too secluded
- There is a reasonable reaction in mitigation of the loss.

The encumbrance of evidence in connection to the initial three components is on the offended party and is on the litigant for the fourth component (the inability to moderate). The standard of verification is for the most part on the adjust of probabilities (the standard may not be so strict where misfortune can't be effectively measured, for example, loss of chance) alluding to Sellars v Adelaide Petroleum NL (1994) 179CLR 332 at 355-6) and underneath .

In spite of the fact that harm is not a component of a reason for activity for break of agreement, "an offended party bears the onus of setting up the degree of his misfortune or damage on the adjust of probabilities. To fulfill the prerequisites of that run, an offended party must, in the event that he is to recoup more than an ostensible sum in such an activity, certifiably set up assessable harm, that is to say, misfortune or damage which is equipped for being measured in financial terms": Amann Aviation at CLR 118; ALR 38.
In the given scenario, the losses incurred by the Golf Unlimited Pty Limited are subject to the 78000 that has been claimed and that is quite a lot of amount against the contract that was made of $12000. Since, the WDG was not aware about the faulty piping. Had they been aware about the faulty piping they would have definitely tried to find out a way to mitigate the loss that may have incurred due to the faulty piping and the damage that has been done.

Another concern related to the costs can be considered on the basis of the two principles.The two important issues which judges are called upon to decide are whether expenses ought to take after the occasion and, provided that this is true, whether the costs payable are limited to "gathering/party" costs, or augment (more often than not by reason of a repayment costs request) to instalment of "specialist/customer" costs. The purpose behind the crevice between a request just for "costs" (recoverable as gathering/gathering expenses) and "specialist/customer" expenses is that, autonomous of any costs arranges, the gatherings to suit have contracted with their individual legitimate agents to pay case costs on a "professional/customer" premise. See the meaning of "lawful expenses" in s 4(1) of the Legal Profession Act 2004 . The gathering/party segment of those expenses will be taken care of by the court's costs arrange, yet unless a request is made for reimbursement costs, specialist/customer expenses won't be recoverable on evaluation, should even now be paid by the triumphant party. The significant hole between specialist/customer and gathering/party expenses is an inspiration for the gatherings to utilize the offer of trade off/Calder bank offer system to settle case. Party/party expenses are known as "expenses on the conventional premise": CPA s 3(1).

Orders for costs have essential impact on the off chance that administration: CPA ss 56(5), 57(1) (d), 60, 61(3) (f), 62(6). These arrangements give judges energy to make an assortment of unique costs requests, for example, net entirety costs (s 98(4)(c)), or to top costs (s 98(4)(d)), and also to make arranges for, or against, non-parties (s 98(1)(b)); Ritchie's Uniform Civil Procedure (NSW) ("Ritchie's"), [s 98.25]-[s 98.30]). Specifically, the court has energy to make costs orders against legitimate experts: s 99. The general statutory costs attentiveness covers the making of such requests where suitable .

In Gates v City Mutual Life Association Society Ltd (1986) 160 CLR 1 at 11-12 Mason, Wilson and Dawson JJ, it was stated in a joint reason that:
In any kind of contract, the contractual damages are paid to the plaintiff in case the plaintiff is in position of performance of the contract, and if it would have been performed then in that case he is entitlement of the damages which may be a part of the total expenditures that were incurred before the completion of the contract. He also has the right to bargain in that case as a result of the reliance loss and expectation loss.

In so, in the given scenario, I agree that the total payment that WDG is ready to pay as a goodwill gesture should be considered by the Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd. Below mentioned are the actions that can be taken as a result of the losses claimed by the Golf Unlimited Pty Ltd:

1. In case of the Relocation of the event of the Morphettville course , the Loss incurred was $50,000, that cannot be claimed as that can be considered under the profitability part and the mitigation of such losses is possible not from the defendant but it can be compensation through the profit earned during the event.

2. Repairing of the piping cost was $12000, and this cost can be very well claimed by the Plaintiff as because of the fault in the piping, the whole event suffered and had to shift at some other place. So these losses are considered under the indemnity of a contract and the same has to be compensated through the payment that has been offered as a goodwill gesture.

3. Rest in case of refunding of membership fee, cancellation of tournament and the loss of the expected benefits come under the condition of accounts of profitability and the remedy of damages can very well be done by considering the profitability part. So, , in few of the contracts of the commercial purpose, it become difficult for the parties , the true value of the profit that could have been occurred before the breach of contract or the occurrence of the losses, in that case , it is theoretically imposed that not following the results of the Tort Law.

Assignment 3:

Australian evaluating measures are set by the Australian Auditing Standards Board (AUASB). Examining principles have the compeling of law for reviews and surveys of Corporations Act substances under area 307A of the Corporations Act 2001.

Our individuals are required by expert and moral standard APES 210 Conformity with Auditing and Assurance Standards to agree to Auditing and Assurance Standards when they lead examining and certification engagements.

This segment of the site is committed to giving individuals the assets they have to comprehend and apply bookkeeping models and stay up to date with every one of the progressions.

Standard improvement handling

Australian examining benchmarks are set by the Australian Auditing Standards Board (AUASB). Evaluating models have the compelling of law for reviews and surveys of Corporations Act substances under area 307A of the Corporations Act 2001 .

Individuals from the Institute are required by expert and moral standard APES 210 Conformity with Auditing and Assurance Standards to agree to Auditing and Assurance Standards when they lead Auditing and Assurance engagements.

The Australian inspecting and affirmation guidelines depend on the International reviewing and certification gauges issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) taking after our usage of global harmonization in 2006. Australian measures are, generally, indistinguishable with their IAASB partners - with a few adjustments that address particular not-for-benefit and jurisdictional issues. These corrections are plainly recognized in every standard with the utilization of AUS sections.

Universal harmonization implies that a lot of standard-setting work worldwide is currently done by the IAASB - with support from national standard-setters (e.g. AUASB). Nonetheless, the AUASB likewise keeps up its standard-setting controls over matters particularly influencing Australia. For more points of interest on the standard setting procedures of this board.

The APESB has likewise considered the way that examining norms issued by the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) have the constraint of law from 1 July 2006 and that these gauges make reference to consistence with 'important moral prerequisites'. The APESB has noticed that the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants will in this way have 'the drive of law' in regard of Corporations Act reviews.

The substantive changes from the previous code are insignificant, however we take note of that the primary elements of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants are that:

- The structure of the Code and the numbering of passages has been reconsidered to acclimate with the IFAC Code;

- Generally, the wording of the IFAC Code has been received; and

- Certain passages that have no comparable in the IFAC Code have been distinguished as Australian sections by embedding are the letters AUST before the section number .

Give solid support to the Australian Government's presentation of the legitimately enforceable models as a fitting reaction to accomplish an expansion in the nature of reviews. Be that as it may, the discoveries in this study should be fittingly put and comprehended inside the setting of the new administration's moderately short usage time period. The long haul impacts

may change and this can't be learned until sometime into the future after additional reviews have been finished under the present administration. Additionally the substances of the lawfully enforceable ASAs may vary for medium and little review firms. Extra research utilizing the genuine working papers of firms would help with affirming the recognitions reported in the momentum examine.

The CLERP 9 Act accommodates Auditing Standards to have the compelation of law for the reasons for the Corporations Act 2001. The Operative Date for the new Auditing Standards will be indicated in every Standard. Be that as it may, it is the AUASB's expectation that the agent date for all Auditing Standards issued by it at first, will be for reviews in connection to budgetary reporting periods beginning on or after 1 July 2006 . The connection to this Guide delineates the application dates for the new Auditing Standards to different monetary reporting periods.

The AUASB is as of now undertaking a huge venture to issue Auditing Standards under segment 336 of the Corporations Act 2001 which will get to be administrative instruments under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 .

The substantive changes from the previous code are negligible, yet we take note of that the primary components of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants are that:

- the structure of the Code and the numbering of sections have been changed to acclimate with the IFAC Code;

With the more extensive, and more reliable, use of the updated examining benchmarks, both inside Australia and universally, the normal advantages to clients of review administrations, clients of review reports, review and confirmation experts, and the Australian economy when all is said in done are, on adjust, prone to exceed expected expenses .

- generally, the wording of the IFAC Code has been embraced; and

- certain sections that have no comparable in the IFAC Code have been distinguished as Australian passages by embeddings .