Reference no: EM131970852 , Length: word count:2000

1. Stanly hired Shirley as his literary agent to find a publisher for his books. When Shirley read Stanly's latest manuscript, she realized it was a best seller. However, she told Stanly the book was so bad that no publisher will want to publish it and offered to pay Stanly $200 for the manuscript. He agreed. Shirley then sold the manuscript to a publisher for $ 500,000. Stanly got to know the deal that Shirley made and wants to sue Shirley. Advise Stanly.

2. Faria orally agreed to sell his house in Sydney downtown, to Ellis for $195,000. Ellis immediately sold her house in Melbourne, gave up her job, and moved her belongings to Sydney. Faria refuses to sell Ellis the house. Can Ellis demand the sale of house? Discuss.

3. Adam and Asqar during weekend decided to go to the ABC Hotel pool for a swim. A sign on the pool door reads: ‘POOL UNDER CONSTRUCTION" ‘Dangerous when unattended'. Adam and Asqar did not read the sign as there was not enough light. They also cannot find the light to the pool so just jumps in. In fact, the pool has been emptied and they badly injured. Discuss the possible liability of hotel management and Adam and Asqar.

4. At a party organised by Dark there were some uninvited guests. One of the uninvited guests was Cindy who Dark thought was the prettiest girl he had ever seen. Dark immediately fell in love with her. Cindy however had to leave before midnight and before Dark could get to know her. Although he tried very hard to find her again he was unsuccessful. In desperation he put up posters of a drawing of her that he had made from memory offering a reward of $500 to anyone who could provide him with information on her. One day Ashy, who had not seen the posters, was talking to Dark and mentioned Cindy. Ashy apparently knew who Cindy was and provided Dark with the information he was seeking. Later Ashy tried to claim the reward of $500 but Dark refused to pay her anything.

Can Ashy bring an action to claim the reward money of $500?

Would your answer be different if Ashy had seen the poster before giving the information to Dark but gave the information only because she wanted to help her friend?

Cindy and Dark subsequently got married but did not live happily ever after. They separated two years later. After their separation Dark agreed to pay her a maintenance allowance of $100 per week, in part, as consideration for Cindy continuing to pay of a joint credit card account. He later defaulted on the payments.

Can Cindy sue Prince for the maintenance allowance he has defaulted on?

- Each individual member of a group will be assessed based on individual contribution to the report. (Each group is expected to give a one page write-up about the contribution of each member of the group. This should be handed over to the lecturer on the day of the presentation/ Submission of your written assignment). Please remember that all the members are expected to co-ordinate with each other and work as a team. The project must be planned and executed as a team.

- Each group should study the case carefully and answer the questions it raises.

- The oral presentation is for 20 minutes for the group (of four students). The time should be equally divided among group members. Each individual student who is a member of the group will make a presentation for 5-7 minutes. He/she will be assessed in terms of how well he/she has met the following criteria: creativity, communication skills, team work, content and ability to provoke discussion on the topic.

Technique for legal problem solving

The legal problem solving model that is most commonly used is characterised by the acronym "IRAC". This stands for "Issue", "Rule of law", "Application of rule to facts" and "Conclusion".

Step 1 - List the legal issues.
The issue in a case is the question of law to be decided by the court. For example, is there a valid contract between A and B? Stating the issue as a question encourages you to find an answer. It also acts to keep you focused on answering the question based on the legal problem and not to become diverted from the issue itself.

Step 2 - State the rule(s) of law applicable to resolving that issue.

This step sets in place the foundation that allows you to more persuasively answer the question posed in step 1. In this step you will quote and explain, for example, a section of a statute or a body of case law developed by the courts over a period of time. It will often not be sufficient to simply mention the section number of a statute. It will almost always be necessary to use the case law that has been developed to give meaning to some of the words and phrases used in interpreting that statute.

Alternatively, if the issue raised is one dealt with exclusively by the common law, then enough information has to be given about the cases cited to determine if the circumstances of the precedent are sufficiently similar to the question being dealt with that the ratio of the precedent applies to this question. Therefore, mention of the case name by itself is not sufficient in this part. You must give a brief statement of the facts followed by an accurate statement of the principle or rule of law that resulted from the decision in that case. There will often be conflicting precedents that you will have to state and examine. In this way you will be able to differentiate the case law to find the precedents that most accurately conform to the facts presented to you.

Step 3 - Apply the rule(s) of law to the facts presented
This is, arguably, the hardest part of this process. This is where you have to analyse the law and determine how it applies to the issues raised and the facts presented in the scenario. This is the step that takes the most practice to achieve competency.

You have cited certain statutes and cases in step 2 for a reason. You have done so because the facts presented to you have brought to mind the cases and material you have been given at lectures or you have read in your textbooks. You have already given an outline of the facts of the appropriate precedent cases in step 2, you do not need to do so again. What you must do is provide a link between the facts in the scenario and the cases cited in step 2.

You need to state why the precedent case law that establishes a legal rule or principle should be applied to the facts presented to you. You must highlight the similarities between the precedent case and your fact pattern.
Alternatively, you should highlight one or more material differences between the precedent case and the matter before you in order that you can then differentiate the cases and justify why a precedent should not apply to your particular circumstances.

Step 4 - Conclusion
Do not forget that in Australia we have an adversarial system of solving legal disputes. This means that for every legal dispute there are at least two different points of view. This means that for any given scenario there may be more than one possible conclusion.