There are three (3) questions and all questions must be answered
Order Description
The assignment will be based on Torts Law (Lectures 4 and 5). The assignment and further instructions about completing the task will be posted on my account.
The focus of the assignment is on identification of legal issues that arise from common business decisions and on conducting your business in a way that complies with any relevant legal
requirements. You are being assessed on your ability to identify legal issues and to explain an appropriate response to the situation.
An acceptable level of referencing to relevant business law texts and articles, business sources, and suitable online resources (e.g. government sites) is required to show us how you supported your answer. You may cite legal materials, such as cases and legislation and this may improve your mark for evidence and referencing, if done accurately.

INTRODUCTION TO BUSINESS LAW, SUMMER2015/2016
ASSIGNMENT (Assessment 2)
Instructions
This document consists of four (4) pages including this page.
There are three (3) questions and all questions must be answered.
Word limit: The word limit forthe entire assignment is 1500 words, excluding referencing.
There is no 10% margin of error on the word limit and you may not use footnotes to get around the word limit (eg, such as by placing extra text in the footnotes – footnotes should be used for the reference only as a general rule, not for added descriptions).
Referencing style:Assignments must be referenced adopting an appropriate business referencing style.
Submission: You must submit your assignment answers in accordance with the procedure outlined in the Learning Guide (i.e., must be submitted through Turnitin). The assignmentmust be submitted by the due date and time, or late penalties will begin to accumulate until received.
Please do NOT affix an Assignment Cover Sheet to your assignment. Assignment Cover Sheets are automatically built-in to Turnitin.
Do NOT attach a copy of these instructions, or of the questions, as part of your assignment, but number your answers to correspond to the numbered questions.
Marking: The marking criteria and standards are set out in the Learning Guide and will be used when marking and to provide feedback on your assignment. You may find it helpful to consult these while working on your assignment. See the Learning Guide for other information about marking and return of assignments, etc.
Assignment Due:Monday 11thJanuary 2016 by 5 pm.
Questions:

1. Michael is a stockbroker who is often asked by clients which shares would make a good investment. Heather had received a large sum of money from her godmother, who had recently died. She spoke to Michael, who was her cousin, regarding investing some of her money in shares. He recommendedcertain mining shares, which she did purchase. Unfortunately some months later the company is placed into liquidation and her shares are worthless.
Using evidence to support your answer, discuss whether Michael owed Heather a duty to exercise care when giving this advice.
(7.5marks)
2. Simon was 14 years old when he was injured.

Simon and his young friend, Ben, were playing a round of golf on a course on the outskirts of Sydney. They paid their green fees and started to play. Simon and Ben had played golf on this course on a number of occasions before. On most, if not all occasions, Simon had encountered kangaroos at various points on the course.

Ben hit a ball into the rough where the grass was about 1 metre high on the third fairway. Notwithstanding a mob of kangaroos feeding in the grass, Simon went in and began to search for the ball.

Whilst doing thishe heard a sound which was like a dog’s growling. He turned and saw a large male kangaroo, which was tallerthan he was, erect on its hind legs, looking in his direction.

Ben backed away from it but thekangaroo hopped towards him. Simon ran, but the kangaroo chased him and brought him to the ground.

An adult golfer, who had just hit his ball off the tee, heard screaming and ran the 70m to where the kangaroo was attacking Simon. As heapproached, he yelled out at the kangaroo whichhopped away. The kangaroo returned to the attack so this other player hit the kangaroo on the head with the driver that he had justused and was still in his hand. The kangaroo then left.

Simon was taken to hospital.

The numerous kangaroos on the course were an advantage in tourist patronageterms. In the 10 years prior to the attack on Simon, an average ofapproximately 42,000 rounds of golf had been played on the courseannually by members and visitors, and kangaroos had caused only a small numberof problems.

The kangaroos were Eastern Grey kangaroos,which are generally not aggressive. Aggression is more likely during their breedingseason, but even then it is rare. Children, because of their smaller stature, are more at risk from attackthan adults.

The golf club had sought and been granted permission to cull individual kangaroos which hadexhibited aggressive behaviour several times prior to the attack on Simon. Other than that, it did nothing about the kangaroos on its course. It did notrequire employees to check for and report aggressive behaviour by kangaroos, it hadnot attempted to obtain available information concerning the nature and extent of therisk from kangaroos or means by which it could be eliminated or reduced, and it didnot give golfers using its course any information or warning concerning thekangaroos.

The golf club now has added a warning to the scorecards which it distributes to golfers, copied from another golf course, namely:

“Wildlife can be hazardous – do not approach”

Does the golf club’s duty include an obligation toprovide golfers on its course with an adequate warning ofthe small risk of injury from an occasional aggressive kangaroo? Using evidence to support your answer, discuss whether the omission by the golf club to warn that kangaroos might attack players amountedto a breach of duty.
(7.5 marks)

3. (Taken from final examination Spring 2015.)

Felicity lives in Newtown. She has a small dog called Fluffy. Every Sunday morning she takes Fluffy to the local off-leash dog park. The park is privately owned and run by Care Free Dogs Pty Limited. Entry to the park is $3.00 per dog payable to the ranger on duty at the gate.

At the gate to the dog park, the ranger, as per his training, must ask the peopleaccompanying the dogs whether the dogs are dangerous or have a history of biting other dogs, and to ask the people for photographic identification. If the answer to either of the questions is yes, the ranger is to refuse entry. The rangers also have a list of people who are banned from bringing their dogs to the park because the dogs have behaved aggressively in the past. The rangers have been trained to check the photographic identification against this list of people.

One Sunday Felicity was at the dog park as usual when Victoria, a fashion model, arrives with her pit bull. The ranger on duty on the gate is so distracted by Victoria’s beauty that he forgets to ask her for identification. He does ask whether the dog is dangerous or has a history of biting, but Victoria answers in the negative. In fact Victoria is on the list of people who are banned from bringing their dogs to the park, because last time she brought her pit bull to the park, it attacked another dog as well as a child.

Once inside the dog park, Victoria lets her pit bull off its leash. The dog runs towards Fluffy and attacks her. Felicity is terribly distressed and tries to break up the dog fight. Victoria laughs and says ‘Oh, aren’t they cute, they want to wrestle!’ She does nothing to call her dog away or try to put it back on a leash, but sits down to look at her Instagram account on her mobile phone.

The ranger runs over with a dog catching device and snares Victoria’s pit bull. He then calls an ambulance as he can see that Felicity has been injured and is bleeding from the face and hands.

Using evidence to support your answer, advise Felicity as to whether the following parties are liable in negligence for her injuries:

i. Care Free Dogs Pty Limited.
ii. Victoria.

(Note for the purposes of this assignment, do not address any animal control or dangerous dog legislation.)
(15 marks)

There are three (3) questions and all questions must be answered
Order Description
The assignment will be based on Torts Law (Lectures 4 and 5). The assignment and further instructions about completing the task will be posted on my account.
The focus of the assignment is on identification of legal issues that arise from common business decisions and on conducting your business in a way that complies with any relevant legal
requirements. You are being assessed on your ability to identify legal issues and to explain an appropriate response to the situation.
An acceptable level of referencing to relevant business law texts and articles, business sources, and suitable online resources (e.g. government sites) is required to show us how you supported your answer. You may cite legal materials, such as cases and legislation and this may improve your mark for evidence and referencing, if done accurately.

INTRODUCTION TO BUSINESS LAW, SUMMER2015/2016
ASSIGNMENT (Assessment 2)
Instructions
This document consists of four (4) pages including this page.
There are three (3) questions and all questions must be answered.
Word limit: The word limit forthe entire assignment is 1500 words, excluding referencing.
There is no 10% margin of error on the word limit and you may not use footnotes to get around the word limit (eg, such as by placing extra text in the footnotes – footnotes should be used for the reference only as a general rule, not for added descriptions).
Referencing style:Assignments must be referenced adopting an appropriate business referencing style.
Submission: You must submit your assignment answers in accordance with the procedure outlined in the Learning Guide (i.e., must be submitted through Turnitin). The assignmentmust be submitted by the due date and time, or late penalties will begin to accumulate until received.
Please do NOT affix an Assignment Cover Sheet to your assignment. Assignment Cover Sheets are automatically built-in to Turnitin.
Do NOT attach a copy of these instructions, or of the questions, as part of your assignment, but number your answers to correspond to the numbered questions.
Marking: The marking criteria and standards are set out in the Learning Guide and will be used when marking and to provide feedback on your assignment. You may find it helpful to consult these while working on your assignment. See the Learning Guide for other information about marking and return of assignments, etc.
Assignment Due:Monday 11thJanuary 2016 by 5 pm.
Questions:

1. Michael is a stockbroker who is often asked by clients which shares would make a good investment. Heather had received a large sum of money from her godmother, who had recently died. She spoke to Michael, who was her cousin, regarding investing some of her money in shares. He recommendedcertain mining shares, which she did purchase. Unfortunately some months later the company is placed into liquidation and her shares are worthless.
Using evidence to support your answer, discuss whether Michael owed Heather a duty to exercise care when giving this advice.
(7.5marks)
2. Simon was 14 years old when he was injured.

Simon and his young friend, Ben, were playing a round of golf on a course on the outskirts of Sydney. They paid their green fees and started to play. Simon and Ben had played golf on this course on a number of occasions before. On most, if not all occasions, Simon had encountered kangaroos at various points on the course.

Ben hit a ball into the rough where the grass was about 1 metre high on the third fairway. Notwithstanding a mob of kangaroos feeding in the grass, Simon went in and began to search for the ball.

Whilst doing thishe heard a sound which was like a dog’s growling. He turned and saw a large male kangaroo, which was tallerthan he was, erect on its hind legs, looking in his direction.

Ben backed away from it but thekangaroo hopped towards him. Simon ran, but the kangaroo chased him and brought him to the ground.

An adult golfer, who had just hit his ball off the tee, heard screaming and ran the 70m to where the kangaroo was attacking Simon. As heapproached, he yelled out at the kangaroo whichhopped away. The kangaroo returned to the attack so this other player hit the kangaroo on the head with the driver that he had justused and was still in his hand. The kangaroo then left.

Simon was taken to hospital.

The numerous kangaroos on the course were an advantage in tourist patronageterms. In the 10 years prior to the attack on Simon, an average ofapproximately 42,000 rounds of golf had been played on the courseannually by members and visitors, and kangaroos had caused only a small numberof problems.

The kangaroos were Eastern Grey kangaroos,which are generally not aggressive. Aggression is more likely during their breedingseason, but even then it is rare. Children, because of their smaller stature, are more at risk from attackthan adults.

The golf club had sought and been granted permission to cull individual kangaroos which hadexhibited aggressive behaviour several times prior to the attack on Simon. Other than that, it did nothing about the kangaroos on its course. It did notrequire employees to check for and report aggressive behaviour by kangaroos, it hadnot attempted to obtain available information concerning the nature and extent of therisk from kangaroos or means by which it could be eliminated or reduced, and it didnot give golfers using its course any information or warning concerning thekangaroos.

The golf club now has added a warning to the scorecards which it distributes to golfers, copied from another golf course, namely:

“Wildlife can be hazardous – do not approach”

Does the golf club’s duty include an obligation toprovide golfers on its course with an adequate warning ofthe small risk of injury from an occasional aggressive kangaroo? Using evidence to support your answer, discuss whether the omission by the golf club to warn that kangaroos might attack players amountedto a breach of duty.
(7.5 marks)

3. (Taken from final examination Spring 2015.)

Felicity lives in Newtown. She has a small dog called Fluffy. Every Sunday morning she takes Fluffy to the local off-leash dog park. The park is privately owned and run by Care Free Dogs Pty Limited. Entry to the park is $3.00 per dog payable to the ranger on duty at the gate.

At the gate to the dog park, the ranger, as per his training, must ask the peopleaccompanying the dogs whether the dogs are dangerous or have a history of biting other dogs, and to ask the people for photographic identification. If the answer to either of the questions is yes, the ranger is to refuse entry. The rangers also have a list of people who are banned from bringing their dogs to the park because the dogs have behaved aggressively in the past. The rangers have been trained to check the photographic identification against this list of people.

One Sunday Felicity was at the dog park as usual when Victoria, a fashion model, arrives with her pit bull. The ranger on duty on the gate is so distracted by Victoria’s beauty that he forgets to ask her for identification. He does ask whether the dog is dangerous or has a history of biting, but Victoria answers in the negative. In fact Victoria is on the list of people who are banned from bringing their dogs to the park, because last time she brought her pit bull to the park, it attacked another dog as well as a child.

Once inside the dog park, Victoria lets her pit bull off its leash. The dog runs towards Fluffy and attacks her. Felicity is terribly distressed and tries to break up the dog fight. Victoria laughs and says ‘Oh, aren’t they cute, they want to wrestle!’ She does nothing to call her dog away or try to put it back on a leash, but sits down to look at her Instagram account on her mobile phone.

The ranger runs over with a dog catching device and snares Victoria’s pit bull. He then calls an ambulance as he can see that Felicity has been injured and is bleeding from the face and hands.

Using evidence to support your answer, advise Felicity as to whether the following parties are liable in negligence for her injuries:

i. Care Free Dogs Pty Limited.
ii. Victoria.

(Note for the purposes of this assignment, do not address any animal control or dangerous dog legislation.)
(15 marks)

There are three (3) questions and all questions must be answered
Order Description
The assignment will be based on Torts Law (Lectures 4 and 5). The assignment and further instructions about completing the task will be posted on my account.
The focus of the assignment is on identification of legal issues that arise from common business decisions and on conducting your business in a way that complies with any relevant legal
requirements. You are being assessed on your ability to identify legal issues and to explain an appropriate response to the situation.
An acceptable level of referencing to relevant business law texts and articles, business sources, and suitable online resources (e.g. government sites) is required to show us how you supported your answer. You may cite legal materials, such as cases and legislation and this may improve your mark for evidence and referencing, if done accurately.

INTRODUCTION TO BUSINESS LAW, SUMMER2015/2016
ASSIGNMENT (Assessment 2)
Instructions
This document consists of four (4) pages including this page.
There are three (3) questions and all questions must be answered.
Word limit: The word limit forthe entire assignment is 1500 words, excluding referencing.
There is no 10% margin of error on the word limit and you may not use footnotes to get around the word limit (eg, such as by placing extra text in the footnotes – footnotes should be used for the reference only as a general rule, not for added descriptions).
Referencing style:Assignments must be referenced adopting an appropriate business referencing style.
Submission: You must submit your assignment answers in accordance with the procedure outlined in the Learning Guide (i.e., must be submitted through Turnitin). The assignmentmust be submitted by the due date and time, or late penalties will begin to accumulate until received.
Please do NOT affix an Assignment Cover Sheet to your assignment. Assignment Cover Sheets are automatically built-in to Turnitin.
Do NOT attach a copy of these instructions, or of the questions, as part of your assignment, but number your answers to correspond to the numbered questions.
Marking: The marking criteria and standards are set out in the Learning Guide and will be used when marking and to provide feedback on your assignment. You may find it helpful to consult these while working on your assignment. See the Learning Guide for other information about marking and return of assignments, etc.
Assignment Due:Monday 11thJanuary 2016 by 5 pm.
Questions:

1. Michael is a stockbroker who is often asked by clients which shares would make a good investment. Heather had received a large sum of money from her godmother, who had recently died. She spoke to Michael, who was her cousin, regarding investing some of her money in shares. He recommendedcertain mining shares, which she did purchase. Unfortunately some months later the company is placed into liquidation and her shares are worthless.
Using evidence to support your answer, discuss whether Michael owed Heather a duty to exercise care when giving this advice.
(7.5marks)
2. Simon was 14 years old when he was injured.

Simon and his young friend, Ben, were playing a round of golf on a course on the outskirts of Sydney. They paid their green fees and started to play. Simon and Ben had played golf on this course on a number of occasions before. On most, if not all occasions, Simon had encountered kangaroos at various points on the course.

Ben hit a ball into the rough where the grass was about 1 metre high on the third fairway. Notwithstanding a mob of kangaroos feeding in the grass, Simon went in and began to search for the ball.

Whilst doing thishe heard a sound which was like a dog’s growling. He turned and saw a large male kangaroo, which was tallerthan he was, erect on its hind legs, looking in his direction.

Ben backed away from it but thekangaroo hopped towards him. Simon ran, but the kangaroo chased him and brought him to the ground.

An adult golfer, who had just hit his ball off the tee, heard screaming and ran the 70m to where the kangaroo was attacking Simon. As heapproached, he yelled out at the kangaroo whichhopped away. The kangaroo returned to the attack so this other player hit the kangaroo on the head with the driver that he had justused and was still in his hand. The kangaroo then left.

Simon was taken to hospital.

The numerous kangaroos on the course were an advantage in tourist patronageterms. In the 10 years prior to the attack on Simon, an average ofapproximately 42,000 rounds of golf had been played on the courseannually by members and visitors, and kangaroos had caused only a small numberof problems.

The kangaroos were Eastern Grey kangaroos,which are generally not aggressive. Aggression is more likely during their breedingseason, but even then it is rare. Children, because of their smaller stature, are more at risk from attackthan adults.

The golf club had sought and been granted permission to cull individual kangaroos which hadexhibited aggressive behaviour several times prior to the attack on Simon. Other than that, it did nothing about the kangaroos on its course. It did notrequire employees to check for and report aggressive behaviour by kangaroos, it hadnot attempted to obtain available information concerning the nature and extent of therisk from kangaroos or means by which it could be eliminated or reduced, and it didnot give golfers using its course any information or warning concerning thekangaroos.

The golf club now has added a warning to the scorecards which it distributes to golfers, copied from another golf course, namely:

“Wildlife can be hazardous – do not approach”

Does the golf club’s duty include an obligation toprovide golfers on its course with an adequate warning ofthe small risk of injury from an occasional aggressive kangaroo? Using evidence to support your answer, discuss whether the omission by the golf club to warn that kangaroos might attack players amountedto a breach of duty.
(7.5 marks)

3. (Taken from final examination Spring 2015.)

Felicity lives in Newtown. She has a small dog called Fluffy. Every Sunday morning she takes Fluffy to the local off-leash dog park. The park is privately owned and run by Care Free Dogs Pty Limited. Entry to the park is $3.00 per dog payable to the ranger on duty at the gate.

At the gate to the dog park, the ranger, as per his training, must ask the peopleaccompanying the dogs whether the dogs are dangerous or have a history of biting other dogs, and to ask the people for photographic identification. If the answer to either of the questions is yes, the ranger is to refuse entry. The rangers also have a list of people who are banned from bringing their dogs to the park because the dogs have behaved aggressively in the past. The rangers have been trained to check the photographic identification against this list of people.

One Sunday Felicity was at the dog park as usual when Victoria, a fashion model, arrives with her pit bull. The ranger on duty on the gate is so distracted by Victoria’s beauty that he forgets to ask her for identification. He does ask whether the dog is dangerous or has a history of biting, but Victoria answers in the negative. In fact Victoria is on the list of people who are banned from bringing their dogs to the park, because last time she brought her pit bull to the park, it attacked another dog as well as a child.

Once inside the dog park, Victoria lets her pit bull off its leash. The dog runs towards Fluffy and attacks her. Felicity is terribly distressed and tries to break up the dog fight. Victoria laughs and says ‘Oh, aren’t they cute, they want to wrestle!’ She does nothing to call her dog away or try to put it back on a leash, but sits down to look at her Instagram account on her mobile phone.

The ranger runs over with a dog catching device and snares Victoria’s pit bull. He then calls an ambulance as he can see that Felicity has been injured and is bleeding from the face and hands.

Using evidence to support your answer, advise Felicity as to whether the following parties are liable in negligence for her injuries:

i. Care Free Dogs Pty Limited.
ii. Victoria.

(Note for the purposes of this assignment, do not address any animal control or dangerous dog legislation.)
(15 marks)