Reference no: EM131226345
PRINCIPLES OF COMMERCIAL LAW ASSIGNMENTS-
Assignment 1 - 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 2 - 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.
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.
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.
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)).
20 harvard references.